And then there were two individuals.
Again, I don't know the addresses, but they showed up, but they didn't live on First Street.
In this letter, they said that the Strawberry Mansion Community Concern Group stated that these are two affected property owners.
We'll take their word for that.
So in their letter, they're in opposition for the following reasons.
No demonstrated hardship.
Well, we clearly have a hardship here.
We have an RM1 property.
We can't change the amount of square footage of our lot.
We're 699 square feet, which is 21 square feet short.
So I think our lot's 14 feet wide, which means that we're like a foot and a half short, like in depth, right?
And that's basically this much. That's how much we're short. And that's why we're here today. So we do have a hardship. And part of it's not self-inflicted because we hired professionals to help us out. And they didn't advise us correctly. And worse, they stole from us.
No community support at the time of the meeting. That is not correct. We had a petition that we circulated pre-meeting that was acknowledged that we circulated a petition pre-meeting by Bonita Cummings, the Strawberry Managing Community Concern.
The reason why we don't present our petition or letters of support to Ms. Cummings was that it's been told of us previously not to present them at the community meeting, that they feel like that we're circumventing the community meeting by having those signatures shown on the screen.
And we said, okay, we hear what you're saying. This is not to be in addition to whatever community input there would be, but we'd always try to reach out to community. That's a good thing, right? To get community support and educate the community of what's going on. I think that's a good thing.
It was told to us at the meeting that, you know, the most recent meeting that she felt like that by doing this, we're not only trying to circumvent the process, but we were acting as kind of almost like bullies.
And I said, no, we're not.
You know, again, all we do is present, you know, the petition or letters to support, which mimic what is within the notice of refusal description of what we're trying to do.
and we give a copy of the notice of refusal
and we ask for people's support
and if they have questions about the project,
you know, we have, you know,
someone who can answer those questions for that,
for those people.
So I don't think we're trying to circumvent the system.
We're not trying to bully people.
We're trying to just get to some outreach to the community
because many times people don't show up
to the community meeting.
And it's really difficult, you know,
to then explain to the CBA
why there's a letter of opposition
when only four people show up
and two of them are people who are representative of those community groups.
Third thing is the proposed project per the applicant's plans to the single-family property
would create increased density within a single-family packing families tightly in this property.
I don't know what that means.
All I can say is that the zoning is R&M 1.
We're proposing to have one bedroom for unit number one.
We're doing one bedroom for unit number two.
So the use is very light.
And again, we didn't want to increase the density by building up higher, by increasing unit count beyond the two units.
So I think this is the least modification possible that we can do under the Philadelphia Zoning Code.
And I think it's a responsible use under the circumstances, especially since it's RM1.
and then you know as part of of of the the letter that we received this i think it was either this
afternoon or this morning i can't remember um they included their own petition and we'll go
through that but there's no signatures from first street which is would be the more affected area
of of the neighborhood for this project and then they also provided a picture from a contractor
at 3441 West 1st Street that I guess did some non-permitted work.
Again, we're here to, we embrace the fact that we hired someone
hired someone who ultimately turned out to be a fraud. My clients had no intention of doing that.
who ultimately turned out to be a fraud.
My clients had no intention.
You know, they wanted to build this as a legal structure or a legal renovation and a legal use.
And that's why we're here today. So what happened at 3441 should have no impact based on what we're
trying to do today. And then here's a picture from 3441, which I don't think is relevant
to the circumstances and then here's the actual signatures from strawberry mansion community
concern on their petition again everything's on west sergeant street looks like some stuff on
34th street some stuff on ridge some stuff on spangler but nothing on first street then we
got a second letter of opposition today from strawberry mansion uh cdc and the thing that
i would point out is they're in opposition they didn't show up to the community meeting
even though I guess they're an RCO, but they're not understanding what this project's about.
In their letter, they're saying the property's in the area that's zoned RSA residential single
family attached. That's not correct. I think they're used to individuals trying to get
variances to increase the density from RSA 5 properties to do multifamily. This is an RM1
property, and we'll look at the zoning map. Everything around it is classified as one-on-one.
And then finally, we received, I think, the latest letter today from Swamp Poodle,
and they had some objections, but ultimately they opposed it. But they said that if the board
does grant it, they have some provisos. And I don't even think that these are bad provisos,
And I think we have an agreement with these. They said no rooftop deck or rooftop structures for occupancy or medical mechanical equipment.
Well, we're not proposing a roof deck access structure. There's no roof deck up there.
So, I mean, I defer to the board in that respect, but we can agree to a proviso, no roof deck access structure or roof deck, but we're not proposing any.
So I don't know if that proviso is necessary.
Then the next proviso, all trash and recycling stored indoors only except on collection days.
We have no objection to that, that the trash be stored indoors.
So that's a enforceable proviso.
The next proviso is limit of two units multifamily.
Well, that's what we're doing, right?
If we wanted to go three units later on, we would have to go in front of this board again to gather variants.
But we have no objection.
We're seeking two units.
Then the next proviso is limit of two stories.
Again, we're not trying to build up.
We're taking the existing building structure, which is two stories in nature.
So we have no objection to that proviso either.
This one, I don't even know it's an enforceable proviso, but as a pet owner and someone who
meets people in my own community by walking my dog, I have an objection to this.
No pets on a lease.
I don't think it's an enforceable proviso.
I think that you create a sense of community by walking around your neighborhood.
I find that people are friendlier to you when you have a dog walking around, you tend to know the dog's names more so than the humans, but I think it's a good way of sense of community. So I have an objection as a pet owner, but I also don't think it's an enforceable proviso. No basement living. We have no objection to that. We actually said that we embraced it. We're like, we don't want basement living. We're not trying to do that.
So like some of the stuff that, you know, again, usually is objectionable to the community that we kind of tussle with, we have no objection to that. So that would be enforceable for RISO, no basement living. And I can't see what's behind my screen, but there's one more dot. No decrease in setbacks at any land or building improvements or yards or facades.
So we're not increasing the building envelope. So again, I don't know if it's required to have that as a proviso. And if we wanted to have a rear building addition, we would have to go in front of the zoning board, more likely than not, given the size of the lot.
So again, in terms of Swampoodle and all their provisos, I think we're on board with all of them that are enforceable. So the next thing is the petition.
Again, we really diligently try to reach out to members in the community and specifically the person, the individuals that own to left and right of us.
And we have that letter. We have three, three, three, seven West 1st Street and we have three, three, three West 1st Street.
We got signatures from both of them who are in support of this project.
And then we have other people on 1st Street as well.
And nearby properties.
And then nearby multifamily, you know, nearby, 3331 West 1st Street is scheduled to be a multifamily structure.
3341 West 1st Street, the same thing.
And then maps of the area.
And then maps of the area. I mean, it's orange. That's what it is. It's not like we're taking a yellow zoning classification of RSA 5 and trying to increase density. And this is where we are in the neighborhood. We're in Strawberry Mansion.
I mean, it's orange.
and the photographs of the property it's a nice handsome two-story structure that just needs some
TLC inside and out and I think that was actually embraced the fact that we were going to restore
the front facade not build up respect the roof line of the community by not adding a third story
even though we could because you can see there's no building structure to the right of us
so as a matter of right we could have built straight up and we chose not to again we're
choosing the least modification possible under the Philadelphia zoning code and trying to not
like overuse this property in any respect. This is our hearing notice posting for this hearing
for today. And then this is West 1st Street to the right of property. Again, it's a two-story
block. We're respecting that. And this is West 1st Street to the left of property. There are some
abandoned houses, you know, there as well. And then there are plans and drawings. We're keeping
are really simple, right? First floor, you come into a vestibule area, you make a right, you have
unit number one, which is a one bedroom, one bath. Go up a flight of steps, another one bedroom,
one bath. In particular, you can see there's no roof deck access structure, and we would agree to
no basement living as well. We would agree to, there's ventilated trash closets in both the
first floor unit and the second floor unit, so we're more than prepared to keep the trash indoors
other than collection day, you know, or night, you know, the night before.
Again, there's a need in the community for these one-bedroom units
because there are people who downsize, who want to stay in the neighborhood,
who want nicer accommodations, and this is what we're providing them.
There's also a lot of families who kids want to move back into the neighborhood
but don't want to live with mom and dad.
This gives them an opportunity to, like, to live nearby.
And then RCO meeting notice, we sent it on December 20th for a meeting for January 3rd.
We emailed that notice to the community leaders.
171 addresses were notified.
Only two people showed up of those 171 addresses.
We were told to provide information on the front page because, you know, again, it's been stated to us, well, people think that this is like junk mail.
So make sure you put something on there indicating that.
So they told us to put in yellow highlight.
You can't see it because it's not in color, but public community meeting.
So we've done everything they've asked of us.
And then these are a list of addresses, proof of mailing to those addresses,
or application for appeal on behalf of BER, properties LLC, notice of refusal,
project information form, deed to the property showing that they own the property.
Excuse me. And the certificate of tax clearance. Again, the only reason why there's a balance is because 2024 taxes aren't due yet. I would then, I'm going to stop sharing my screen. I would ask that either Noah or Alyssa virtually raise their hand, be sworn in, and they can adopt my testimony. And then we can take any questions from the board and respond to the community.
hi no could you state your name please and spell for the court stenographer
sure it's noah berson n-o-a-h my last name b-e-r-s-o-n do you swear or affirm to tell
the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth yes proceed counsel oh yes no you heard
everything i had to say today about your zoning matter correct and is it true and correct what i
stated yes and do you adopt as your own testimony yes all right thank you questions from the board
what questions or comments from hillary emerson our attorney not at this time mr chair
questions or comments from the virtual audience
yes chair i have strawberry mansion community i will allow to speak
Good afternoon.
On you, please.
Hi, good afternoon.
Hi, can you hear me now?
Yeah, I can.
You already were sworn once today, so you can just start your testimony.
You must state your name for the record.
Good afternoon.
My name is Bonita Cummings, and if I didn't mention it this morning,
happy new year to everyone oh thank you and greetings chairman bergman and the board um
oh thank you and greetings chairman bergman and the board um i would like the opportunity to speak
um you know through this without being cut off the the attorneys are given time um to rebuttal
or have a second or third opportunity to speak but the rvcos are not given any second remarks
opportunities so can i please speak to this matter before being cut off you know it's just kind of
We don't usually try to cut people off, but sure, speak.
Some of the statements that Alan Nocklinson Esquire is making are incorrect.
The statement he keeps making about me saying that we don't want him to present petitions during the public community meetings is not any conversation that I've had with him.
Also, when we asked for the petitions in this case, they said that they were in progress.
So I just wanted to, you know, clear that up because he keeps saying it as he continues to come to these meetings in reference to strawberry-mantier community concern.
The quadrant of areas surrounding 3335 West 1st Street is lived in by many elders, 80, 90 years of age.
They have been in Strawberry Mansion now, the 4th Councilmanic District, for almost all their lives.
The tactics used by Alan Knacklemson Esquire and his firm is having strangers approach them for signatures to support matters that have a public meeting process has been very disturbing.
Alan Nackamson, Esquire, is using tactics by any means necessary, even if it is detrimental to the senior citizens of our community.
I have received many calls about this alarming approach.
Further, RCOs don't receive payment, and these tactics are often petitions or letters without the knowledge of what people are signing.
Many are signing because they may be afraid or bullied, even.
Also, the petitions and letters doubling the work of what the non-paid RCOs have to do and making our work more taxing.
However, you can see that we have matched in opposition the number of nearest neighbors in opposition and could have gotten more signatures due to the burden of hardship this community has experienced from illegal renovations.
This is unnecessary pitting neighbors against one another when we have a public meeting process.
We want the board to be aware how this negatively affects our community.
The names starred on the two petitions are very active block captains and have full support of the nearest neighbors in opposition.
Further to the point of the address 3335 West 1st Street, the owners, Noah Burson, Burr Properties, LLC, were caught by licenses and inspections trying to turn a single family property into a multi-use property, and now not before this board.
Their illegal construction debris destroyed the adjacent lot, and the community was left to clean it up.
We have photos of proof that we did not have available to us at the time of sending in this information because we had to divert our time to going through the community to get a signature.
So it took us away from our focus of putting our package together.
33-31 and 33-41 West First Street.
And the presentation materials are lots.
Nothing is on these parcels, so no comparison. They stated at the public meeting on January 3, 2024, that they have 20. Burr properties have 20 or more rental properties, and therefore were well aware that 3335 West 1st Street requires zoning due to a lot area regulation, but yet they put the blame on their contractor.
We have no way of knowing if any of that is even true or correct.
What landed them here was illegally renovating 3335 West 1st Street.
The refusal indicates that the lot area starts with not enough lot area required for a two-family dwelling,
irregardless of whether or not it's an RM1 district or RM1 area.
This particular property, as they well knew, would not allow them to renovate that property into two family units without a variance, without coming before this board.
units without a variance, without coming before this board. The architectural drawings
don't show the room dimensions purposely, so you can't see how small this property space would be.
So we had, you know, we have to try as RCOs to, you know, get volunteers or look ourselves,
you know, continue to try to learn reading these architectural drawings, and then the
presentation comes to our community with no dimensional information, as if we were so stupid,
we would not be able to make sense out of these drawings to be able to understand that this
particular proposal is being put in a very, very small, trying to make two apartments out of a
very, very small house. If they do the stairwell to code 36 inches, that takes away from the first