um primary access to the site or i should say exclusive access to the site will be from
warrington uh to curb cuts um we will also be providing um landscaping and a public park
um to be accessed off the 50 the public park to be accessed off the 50th street
through a new stairwell. Let me give you a sense, if I may, members of the board,
of the unit configuration within the buildings. Remember, we're going to have 104 units total,
and building A will contain a total of 51 units. Five of those units will be configured as one
bedrooms containing 655 square feet of square footage for occupancy. 30 of those units will be
two-bedroom, 940 square feet, and 16 will be three-bedroom units of approximately 1170 square
The intention is to create a diverse living facility available to families, individuals, etc.
Now, Building B is similar. That will contain a total of 53 affordable dwelling units, configured as follows.
Five one-bedroom units, 10-unit size, 655, 32-bedroom units, again, 943 feet, and finally, 18 three-bedroom units, 1170 square feet.
um because the the property is zoned industrial two the total far that would have been allowed
gross floor area that would have been allowed on site is 375,000 square feet we're proposing a
total gross floor area of 131,000 square feet roughly one third the building height
will be set at 72 feet. Again, that's shown on the proviso plans, and you can see some renderings
indicating that as well. Our building coverage, the code would allow us 80 percent
in the industrial zone. We're providing 35 percent, so a significant amount of open area
affording landscaping, affording active recreational use will be provided.
Provide two loading areas. All access for that will be off of Barrington.
Loading will be positioned behind the building.
Loading will be positioned behind the building, as indicated there with the cursor.
It will be shielded from view of the residential area, be used for tenant move-ins, move-outs, as well as for trash removal from the project.
34 bicycle parking spaces will be made available.
Our parking field includes not only handicapped accessible spaces, but electric vehicle spaces as well.
I should point out to the board, before I get into a few more comments, that this project had been reviewed by the Civic Design Review Committee on December 7, 2021.
One, the Civic Design Review approval letter is in the packet.
A number of the changes that you're seeing in the Proviso plan reflect comments made by both community, but also Civic Design Review members.
So if I may take a moment to just indicate the changes between the original plan submitted and the Proviso plan before the board today.
We have reduced the building footprint substantially.
The building footprints are now 10,918 feet.
Previously, they were 12,474 and 14,126 feet on the previous plan.
We've reduced the gross floor area to $65,500 approximately per building.
Previously, building A was almost 79,000 square feet of floor area.
Building B was almost 71,000 square feet of floor area.
We have unified and created a consistent height configuration for both buildings at 72 feet.
Previously, the building A was close to 75 and a half feet.
I mentioned again, unit count at 104, parking at 99.
If I may ask to share the renderings of the site to give you an illustration of how the buildings will be positioned, the materiality, the parking, and how the buildings are sited as close to the rail tracks as we can.
Again, this plan that you see, as I said previously, is a consensus plan.
A lot of deliberation went into it, and the consensus with the community was to set the buildings back from 50th Street and from Warrington and place the parking in that configuration that you see.
This is the public community park that we're creating, accessed off of 50th. We have a significant grade change along the site, as you can see from the retaining wall, and this will allow for an enlivening of the streetway, active recreational use, both by our residents, as well as by the community.
Within the site, you can see numerous areas of landscaping and active and passive recreational areas.
We've enhanced the landscaping substantially, again, as a result of community input, as well as comments received from Civic Design Review.
And at this point, members of the board, I will pause.
I believe you've referenced the letters of support.
Mr. Chair, if you want, I can indicate who they are from for the record.
You could, why don't you just indicate who they're from?
Southwest Philadelphia District Services, Cedar Park Neighbors, Earth Keepers, Inc., and I believe, I'm not going to steal any thunder, I believe Andrew Goodman is here for the Councilwoman.
And I would I would point out to the board that the RCOs that participated in the review of the plan and development consisted of about, I believe, five total RCOs.
So you get a sense of of the depth of the community involvement in this process.
the depth of the community involvement in this process.
Do you want to have your client adopt your testimony?
I'd like to do that.
Could,
Polina,
could you raise your hand and be admitted as a panelist,
please?
Hi, good morning.
Could you state your name and spell for the court reporter?
Hi, good morning.
My name is Polina Bakhtiara, first name P-O-L-I-N-A, last name B as in boy, A-K-H-T as in Tom, E-I-A-R-O-V as in Victor.
Great. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Proceed.
Polina, good morning. You've heard the testimony and the facts and the description of the project that I've given this morning, have you?
Correct.
And is that true and correct, to the best of your knowledge?
Yes, it is.
And in fact, you have played a role in this project as a project manager from inception. Is that correct?
Yes, it is.
And you've engaged with the community from the onset for approximately two years. Is that correct?
Yes, it is.
So having heard everything I described, would you adopt that as your own testimony were you to testify today?
yes i would thank you thank you questions from the board no mr chairman no mr chairman
i'm going to go to the virtual audience mr stole would you want to call your client now
yes i can make my presentation and just have my client adopt my testimony if that's that's fine
thank you we just need to be sworn in i believe yeah right do you swear or affirm to tell the
truth? The whole truth is nothing but the truth. Yes, I do. Thank you. So good morning again. My
name is Andrew Stoll. I represent a neighbor, Lisa Johannismeier. Simply put, members of the
board, there's just no hardship here, and the applicant hasn't met the heightened standard for
the variances, the multiple variances that he's requesting. So it bears emphasis that not only
is he asking for variances for dimensional requirements, but he's asking for variances
for the use. This use is not permitted in the zoning district, in the I-2 zoning district.
So if we go to hardship, you know, what have we heard and what have you seen that tells you that
there is something unique about this property? There are certain physical circumstances about
this property that prohibit it from being developed in strict conformity with the zoning
ordinance. And simply, there's nothing. In fact, historically, this has been used and even
even recently was used for permitted purposes. So that in and of itself defeats any showing of
a hardship. You know, if I go to the second requirement that due to the hardship, you can't
use in conformance with the ordinance requirements, I'd like to pull up, if I may, if I can share my
screen so what i have on my screen is just but you put it we don't see your screen mr oh i'm sorry
how about now we have it now okay thank you so simply if we just go down like i said this has
been for many years and even recently used for industrial purposes um without issue now again
the applicant was tasked with and his the applicant's burden to show that there are
circumstances and conditions of this property that make it such that it cannot be used in strict
conformance with the code if i just go down what's on my screen in the zoning table for the i2
district i mean it can be used for passive recreation it can be used for safety services
It can be used as a transit station. It can be used as utilities and service, basic and major, business and professional uses, building supplies and equipment.
If I even go to the second page.
It can be used for animal services. It can be used for building services, business support, financial services, maintenance and repair of consumer goods, parking, non-accessory, radio, television, and recording services.
And to that point, my understanding is that there's actually a satellite tower or a video tower on the property that's about 150 feet as they stand there, as it stands today.
Commercial vehicle repair and maintenance, commercial vehicle sales and rental, personal vehicle repair and maintenance, vehicle fueling station, vehicle equipment and supplies, sales and rental, vehicle paint and fishing shop.
I mean, the list goes on and on. Equipment, material, storage, yards and buildings, moving and storage facilities, a warehouse, wholesale sales and distribution, artist studios and art.
a warehouse, wholesale sales and distribution, artist studios and artisan industrial,
limited industrial. Like I said, the property has been used for industrial purposes for many years.
In fact, there is a property, my understanding, right next to it that is actually used and being
used right now as a car storage facility, as a car maintenance repair shop, which is a permitted
use in the I-2 district. So you have been given nothing by the applicant to show that this
property, which is actually much, much larger than the property next to it, cannot be used in
conformance with your ordinance. One of the arguments I would just like to reiterate here
is in terms of what we're seeing is that this is all about profitability. What the applicant is
asking you to do is to disregard the zoning code and say that, you know what, you've heard how great
the project is, but you haven't heard how it conforms with the zoning ordinance or how it
meets the requirements for a variance. So what they're looking for might be what the applicant
thinks is the highest and most profitable use of the property, but that's not why zoning's there.
You know, you had heard that this is a bladed area. Well, bladed or not, the zoning code is
the zoning code, and those requirements are in place. So if I keep going just through the
requirements, that the variance will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood.
But as you heard, it's surrounded mostly by residential homes.
These are one and two-story residential homes.
If I bring up another.
So if you'll see on the zoning map, it is surrounded by residential areas, but residentially zoned areas.
So we are now putting in a proposed 72-foot building into an area that is primarily two-story dwellings.
And I'll see this, which is all shown through these exhibits.
So these renderings show that it's the proverbial sticking out like a sore thumb.
Again, all two-story homes.
So putting a 72-foot building or 272-foot buildings there, which is going to be 104 units, is just simply, it's not in conformance with your code.
The next requirement is that the hardship can't be cured by the grant of a dimensional variance.
That's somewhat mute because the applicant seeking, I believe, three or four given interpretation issues, dimensional variances, and the use variance.
The use variance in and of itself defeats the applicant's ability to comply with that requirement.
Moreover, the applicant was burdened to show that they're asking for the minimum variance to afford the relief necessary or that they're asking for the least modification possible.
Well, coming in with a use that is not permitted is simply not coming in with the least modification possible.
And you can throw that same position with respect to the setbacks, with respect to the loading spaces, all other variances that the applicant needs to see.
Again, there's just simply nothing that's been provided to you, despite the project being on property that might be blighted or maybe not aesthetically pleasing to the applicant.
It's not permitted.
In terms of the next requirement that the project be in harmony and spirit with the code, again, I can't stress enough, this is not a permitted use.
And the zoning is there for a reason.
So even if we love this project and think that this is a great idea, it doesn't belong on this property.
And even if the residential uses were permitted on the property, what the applicants proposing is grossly consistent with the surrounding area.
As you can see on my screen, these are all two-story homes, and we're coming in with two buildings that are 72 feet in height.
You have to consider, too, what kind of traffic and thruway is going to be placed on the surrounding streets, which are not very large streets, by all the 104 units that are going to be in the proposed project.
And to that same point with the next requirement, congestion and general welfare, you know, the applicant had to show you that the grant of the variance will not substantially increase congestion in the public streets, increase the danger of fire or otherwise endanger the public health, safety or general welfare.
Again, what has been provided to you to show that the 104 units in a primarily two-story residential area fits that requirement?
You have 100 plus units, you have 100 plus cars, two to 400 people, give or take.
And when you talk about deliveries to and from the property, you know, Amazon, moving vehicles, people coming in and out, how is this not work strike against the health, safety, and general welfare?
One point I want to just make with respect to congestion, there is a through street, and I'll show you, I'm sorry, a no through street.
So there is a through street and I'll show there is, I'm sorry, a no through street. And this is right at the corner of the property. And what I'm showing you on my screen is a sign where you'll say it says no through street and then a map that shows the location of that no through street.
So we're really questioning how traffic is going to be handled and how there's not going to be congestion from what the applicant's proposing.
And again, I would ask, what has the applicant shown you to say that there is not going to be significant congestion?
Especially because I understand right now that there is 104 units, I believe, was presented.
But the plan has been changing. It's going up and down and up and down with the number of units.
So, what's not to say that we can move forward and now it's 150 units.
Similarly, with respect to injury to the surrounding uses, again, it was the applicant's burden to prove to you that the variance will not substantially or permanently injure the appropriate use of adjacent conforming properties or impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent conforming properties.
But all the reasons that I just stated, putting these two 72-foot monstrosities in the neighborhood fly against that.
And one other thing I want to show is right off of, and these were plans that were previously presented.
These are the two buildings on my screen now.
There is a drop-off, or at least there was a drop-off right off of this street here, right in front of the properties.
that is about a 50 foot drop or 15 15 foot drop off and as you'll see it here so while to some
the properties may be 72 feet high if you are further out including like my client
they become about 90 feet out so I understand that there's been different plans changes to the
plans and things like that but again that goes goes directly against what the applicant had to
do, and it was to show that it was not going to have adverse impacts on adjoining properties.
With respect to adversely affecting transportation or undueling, burdening local roadways,
sewer, schools, parks, all the same reasons that I just stated really apply here. We're adding in
an undetermined number of people with at least 104 units into an area that's just not suited for it.
You know, moving on, the grant of the variance will adversely and substantially affect the implementation of any adoptive plan. I don't believe that really applies here.
What they're doing, again, and not to beat the proverbial horse here, is that they're asking to use something in a way that's not permitted by your code.
And in terms of the last prong, the applicant was to show you that the grant of the variants
will not create any significant environmental damage, pollution, erosion, or siltation.
It will not significantly increase the danger of flooding, either through construction,
or the applicant had to take measures that there were not environmental damage during construction.
Just to that same point, if I can wrap it all up here, is, again, it's not a permitted use.
you know, what has the applicant given to you to show that they can't develop this property
in a way that's in conformance with your code? And I thank you for your time. If I can, I just
have, I'd like to have Ms. Johannes Meyer adopt my testimony. Absolutely. Thank you.
Mr. Chairman, I'm going to let Mr. Stoll have her adopt the testimony. I'd like the right to
ask her a couple of questions. Number one, I'd also like the right to respond to Mr. Stoll
whenever the chair feels it's important because um uh he's made a lot of statements that need
right well let's let's talk to his client first sure do you state your name and spell for the
court reporter please your name is melissa johaningsmeyer it's m-l-i-s-s-a-j-o-h-a-n-g-s-m-p-i-e-r
okay thank you do you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth
i affirm thank you mr stall good morning mr hansmeyer um were you present did you hear
the testimony that i just gave to this board yes um do you agree with the statements that i made
and adopt them as your own yes do you believe them to be truthful and accurate and and uh
accurately reflect um your testimony as if it was your own yes i have nothing further mr chairman
Thank you. Mr. Kelsen, you have a question. Sure. Mr. Hannes-Meyer, I hope I'm pronouncing it correctly. Good morning. Can you indicate where you reside?
I reside at 913 South St. Bernard Street, but I also own 918 South St. Bernard Street.
you're breaking up a little bit. You, where do you live? Where do you live? 913 South St. Bernard
You're breaking up a little bit. Where do you live?
Street. And you also own a property at which address? 918 South St. Bernard Street. And is
that um property one in which you live in the 918 it is a vacant lot i see i have no further
questions thank you very much but i'd like to offer my rebuttal very briefly if i may well well
let me what why don't i go let's get some other people who may be in the virtual audience first
counselor other comments from the virtual audience statements chair excuse me this is the court
reporter could I please have the previous witness spell her name I don't believe I got it clear