traditional hotel environment they want to be in the neighborhood and and to feel philadelphia
um and then there's individuals who have a connection to philadelphia maybe they've lived
there in the past and they have friends and family there or um they they actually have you know like
their extended family there and they need additional um like space for them to accommodate
them because the houses in some parts of philadelphia are not that large so those are the
two sets of individuals people who want to see philadelphia for the first time but not in the
in the traditional sense going to like you know a traditional hotel and people who need to leverage
these airbnbs for their own purposes like you know we just had the holiday season you know
Christmas. A lot of times you have extended family that come from out of town. They need
these accommodations. So, you know, again, there are a lot of Airbnbs nearby. And then we'll look
at maps of the area, photographs of the property, inside and out and contextually in the neighborhood,
or simple plans and drawings, or RCO meeting notice for a meeting that was not well attended,
close vote, and we don't know who voted for and who voted against, or application for appeal,
So our deed to the property, showing their WISWITH LLC,
see on the property, and I have in the virtual audience,
Benjamin Horst, who's the owner's representative,
and our certificate of tax clearance,
showing that my client is compliant with their real estate tax obligations.
Notice refusal.
This is an RSA-5 property.
We're not trying to increase the density here.
We're just trying to get visitor accommodation use for a single-family dwelling.
link. Correspondence from the Point Breeze CDC, again, they had three people in support,
four people opposed. Doesn't really break down between the affected area and non-affected area.
Doesn't break down between board members and non-board members. So it's really hard to tell
who was in support and who was against it. But it does say in here, VAs, which I assume is visitor
combinations would be great if they cater to out-of-town guests, which we would. We don't
discriminate between people who are from out-of-town or from people who have some type of affiliation
or history inside the city of Philadelphia as well. And there are petitions. So again,
we gave a map to show the effort my client made here in terms of garnering community support.
and you can see there's it's all within a two-block radius and specifically within walk-ins
and on pier street which we are behind showing that the people who would be most directly impacted
support this project and then here's our paperwork that support that um proposition
with a petition and then letters to support form letters to support
and then nearby airbnbs again where we are is is this dot here and as you can see there's
dot here and as you can see there's a number of airbnbs within probably a four block radius
a number of airbnbs within probably a four block radius
so not out of character to have airbnbs in this neighborhood in this part of the neighborhood
and then maps of the area we are in rsa5 property we're not trying to increase density here
instead of having you know combinations for more than 30 days we want accommodations for less than
30 days that's the only difference and then this is a map of the area from a google maps perspective
As you can see, there's ample public transportation, which surrounds us.
And then photographs of the property.
We're not changing the building structure in any way.
It's a two-story building structure.
Proof of posting for today's hearing.
And then I just wanted to show you contextually what, you know, the street looks like on walk-ins.
And then this is just the backyard.
And, you know, again, we refreshed the property by putting new fencing in the backyard.
And then the interior photos, nice furniture, you know, new hardware floors, painted,
like updated bathroom, bathrooms, updated kitchen, washer and dryer.
And then there are plans and drawings.
We have no basement use, as you saw from the pictures.
We just have a washer and dryer down there.
You walk into the front doors, an open floor plan, the delivery room, half bath in the kitchen.
You go up a flight of steps.
There's three bedrooms and one bath.
There's no roof deck.
We had an RCO meeting notice that was sent out on December 4th for a December 18th community meeting.
We emailed that also to the coordinating RCOs and the other RCOs, as well as the district council members only ate about the community meeting. 168 addresses were notified. Only seven showed up. And we got over 20 people who separately supported this project by way of signing the petition and or the form letter of support.
These are the addresses, proof of mailing to those addresses, or application for appeal on behalf of WISWITH, along with the notice of refusal and the project information form, deed to the property, showing that WISWITH owns the property, and then a certificate of tax clearance.
They actually overpaid their taxes, so they owe nothing to the city of Philadelphia.
I will unshare my screen.
I would ask that Mr. Horst virtually raise his hand and be sworn in.
Mr. horse is allowed to speak. Thank you. Mr. horse. Could you state your name? Please spell for the court stenographer. Yes. Benjamin Horst B. N. J. A. M. I. N. Horst. H. O. R. S. T. Do you swear or firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth? I do.
We'll see council. Yeah. Mr. Horst, you heard everything I had to state today about your zoning matter. I did. And is it true and correct? Correct.
and do you adopt as your own testimony i do thank you 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
yes chair i have heather light neck now we're allowed her to speak
hi could you please state your name and spell for the court stenographer
Hi, my name is Heather Waitnack. It's H-E-A-T-H-E-R. Waitnack is W-E-I-G-H-K-N-E-C-H-T.
Right. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Please proceed.
I just wanted to raise my hand, let you guys know that I live in the neighborhood. I live
on the 2100 block of Cross Street. I just wanted to support this proposal to rezone the property
as a short-term rental, because in general, I do see it as a benefit to the community,
and I think we need more lodging options within the neighborhood for when friends and family
are in town, priced better than a hotel, and closer than Center City.
Thank you very much for taking the time to call.
Is there anyone else in the virtual audience?
No more, Haynes, Chair.
Planning Commission.
Good afternoon, Chair.
Peter Bernard for the Planning Commission.
The comprehensive plan recommends no change to the existing RSA 5 single-family residential at this location.
We feel the applicant has failed to demonstrate any hardship that would prevent this property from being used in strict conformity with the code.
Accordingly, the Planning Commission recommends the Board deny the variance.
Thank you. MI 2023-005-747-1930 says Gwakin Street.
I vote yes with Proviso.
I vote yes with proviso. Temporary variance expires.
Temporary variance expires 1-10-26.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is no.
James Snell, my vote is yes with Proviso.
Hillary, we'll have to hold this and have Ish look at it on the film, on the video.
Yes, we will. Yes, we will need to revote it with board member Shahid.
We'll do this next week. Yes, we will.
OK. Yes. Thank you.
OK. Number 11. MI 2023-005-890-2246 Herb Street.
Sean Whalen is the attorney.
There's a letter of opposition from Point Breeze Community Development Coalition,
a letter of opposition from the council president.
john whalen has been promoted here okay
mr whalen just state your name please and spell for the court stenographer
certainly good afternoon sean whalen w-h-a-l-e-n here from vintage law right do you swear or
affirm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth yes i do mr hollman has
us a few questions. Of course. Good afternoon, counsel. Good afternoon. Do you agree to waive
the reading of the refusal or referral and stipulate to his accuracy? Yes, I do. Did you
email all the exhibits and documents as required five days in advance to this hearing? Yes.
Thank you. Please proceed and share your screen.
Of course. I am here on behalf of the owner and applicant, JC in PA, Real Estate Investments Co. LLC, and I am representing, if it popped up for you, I hope, an aerial map.
I am representing the application in front of you for 2246 Earp Street. Thankfully, a pretty straightforward matter for you today. Small lot, 690 square feet approximately, mid-block just off of South 23rd Street, just two blocks off of Point Breeze in the Point Breeze neighborhood.
Again, you can see fully built out. This is a single-family neighborhood, all RSA 5 everywhere around it. This is an existing single-family house that was partially built previously.
here's the house right here in its current state and you can see again here it is on the right
just down you can see the completely built out nature of the of the block
so we made an application and we have one refusal which is the roof deck access structure must be
setback five feet from the extreme rear of the building here you can see the issue i'll actually
zoom in make it a little bit easier to see this is 2246 erp street this is the pilot house and
here the stairs come up with a pilot house under the current code this is required to be set back
five feet as the adjacent property is from the rear building line. You can see actually this is
the immediate, you know, one immediate neighbor. And we have over 20 examples in our package of,
you know, exact situations like this. So the situation was that, oh, and I should say there
were four people at the meeting, at the RCO meeting. They voted in opposition. They took
the position that the building should be, all buildings should be built without variances
in accordance with the code.
And I would certainly agree that if this building were a vacant lot to be brought today, that
should be the outcome here.
But unfortunately, that's not the case we have, and we're presenting a very different
scenario for the board today.
so we have back in 2019 the prior owner who owned the property pulled a single family permit
with a roof access structure attached the plans are in here it's all a matter of public record
and several months later pulled a residential building permit for that same building that you
just saw. The builder and developer at that time began construction and got it to
began construction, and got it to, as you could see, its current state as it is. So it's largely
finished with the mechanicals and everything roughed in and built out. And what happened
was in 2019 the roof deck that I showed you like this was fully permitted and approved
and it was built in accordance with LMI requirements and inspections. For reasons only the
builder knows, he ran into a number of issues and lost this property mid-construction to
share of sale. My client purchased the property out of share of sale approximately April of last
year. And once he built, once he bought it, proceeded to start working with L&I in order to
get the zoning permit and building permits renewed. So the zoning permit and building
permit had expired because they were from 2019. So the existing condition that you see has been
the situation since the fall of 2019. No changes have taken place since then, and my client has
done no work at the property, is simply at this time trying to get it permitted for what it was.
In the interim between when it was originally permitted and today, the code has changed,
and this roof deck would now have to be set back five feet from the rear building line.
Unfortunately, you know, we are not in that situation anymore, and it's already built.
So let me get you back.
You can see here's an indication of the pilot house from the actual roof itself.
You can see the stairway, the interior pilot house, and you can see the staircase is actually built as a continuous staircase all the way from the ground level up.
all of the structural components are built in
and the house was fully designed as you see it.
And now what you can see is this is 2247 ERP,
just immediately across the street,
has the same situation where the roof deck is built
all the way to the rear property building.
2110 ERP has the same situation.
2210 up and down the block you can see the same condition over and over and over again and again
if the board has any questions i'm happy to walk through them but i don't want to waste the board's
time we have images here of 20 different properties in the immediate vicinity that all have this same
rear pilot house condition so you know in order to have a variance granted and i understand why
an RCO might take the position that single-family houses at a minimum should be built in accordance
with the code. In order for a variance from the existing code, we need to show three things. We
need to show an unnecessary hardship that was not caused by the current owner. We need to show that
there was no detriment to the public health, safety, or welfare. And we need to show that
what we're asking for is the least minimum variance. First and foremost, as we set forth
this building was built and in its current condition for over four years at this point and
here we go and you know with without any changes or additions or construction of any kind by the
current owner so he did not create this situation rather this existing building was built with
fully approved permits. That's Zoning Permit 89-55-14 from February of 2019 and Associated
Building Permit number 851-335 from June of 2019. Now, in order to, you know, I wish it were so
simple and I have the project architect on the call or at the meeting here to discuss this,
you know it's not simply not possible to just move this pilot house forward five feet
again this is the whole building is designed both structurally and built as is with that pilot house
in the current location and it would be exorbitantly expensive if even possible to try to
move that pilot house even one foot let alone five feet because of as I showed those images
because of, as I showed those images before, it's already in a fully built condition.
before, it's already in a fully built...
And that ties all the way down through the entirety of the building. So the entire building
would have to have a new structural design. It would have to move entirely the entire stairs
and so forth. There is no detriment here to the public health, safety, and welfare.
Again, we pulled 20 examples for the board's consideration. They were in our package of this exact situation that was permitted and allowed at the time that this building was built.
And moreover, this exact location and build out has been in place, as I said, for over four years.
So there's no detrimental impact to the public because this is part of the fabric of the public at this time.
um and finally uh we are asking for the least minimum variance which is uh to not change the
status quo again this was previously permitted by code all we're trying to do is move this forward
and remove you know a bring a vacant building uh to completion that was purchased out of sheriff's
sale and lost and vacant and has been for some time and bring it to completion and make it an
active participant in this neighborhood. So with that, I'm happy to answer any questions that the
board may have, or I can call my client and the project architect to discuss the hardship.
Why don't you bring your client on?
Thank you. His name is Jeff Ko. He should be raising his hand now.
Yes, Jeff Ko has been allowed to speak.
Sir, could you state your name, please, and spell for the court stenographer?
Mr. Ko
Do we see his hand up?
Yes, I did give him permission to speak.
I just did it again.