you're going to see on this particular street. I think that the average that I was able to
calculate was closer to about 1,200, which is pretty much what we're proposing with this
application. We don't believe that the addition of these single-family homes would have any
negative impact on neighbors. We did have an RCO meeting with Faith Community Development
Corporation on March 10th, so just last Thursday, and near neighbors did attend the meeting.
The feedback that we received from the neighbors at that time was that they thought that the application that we're proposing here is more in line with what you will currently see in this location.
um we had previously been proposing to put pilot houses and roof decks on the on the um single
family homes that we're proposing here but the neighbors uh asked that we remove those because
they feel as though that wouldn't be consistent with what's currently in the neighborhood
that wouldn't be consistent with what's currently in the neighborhood and the owner was amenable to
and the owner was amenable to doing
doing that and there was discussion also of the fact that a buy right application i'm sorry the
buy right project would kind of be out of character in this location because it would result in over
oversized houses with roof decks and pilot houses which again the neighbors didn't want to say
a letter of support from faith community development corporation was previously sent
to the board with me this morning is our principal designer bar levy as well as elad bella mr levy
is available for any questions that any members of the board might have relative to the design
but i would like to call mr bella forward to adopt my testimony
so elad if you could hit the raise hand feature so that you can be identified
could you state your name and spell it for the court reporter please
sure elad bella e l a d b e l a do you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth
and nothing but the truth i do proceed thanks so much mr bella did you hear my testimony this
morning yes and was everything that i said true and accurate yes and uh would you like to adopt
my testimony as your own yes thank you so much uh members of the board if you have any questions
questions from the board no mr chairman no no mr chairman questions or comments from the virtual
audience excuse me mr chair if um miss o'neill could i ask you one question you submitted five
plans of revised paper five pages of revised plans on the attached form the only changes listed were
removal of the um pilot houses and roof decks can the board just add a proviso stating no pilot
houses or roof decks instead of the plans yes that would be fine with us thank you thank you
questions from the virtual audience yeah we have charles richardson
good morning mr richardson state your name and spell for the court reporter please
good morning mr chair charles richardson ch-a-r-l-e-s-r-i-c-h-a-r-d-s-o-n office of
councilwoman cindy bass from 312 city hall do you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth
nothing but the truth i do proceed councilwoman has no opposition to granting this variance
Thank you very much for calling in. Any other comments from the virtual audience?
I see no hands, Chair. Planning Commission? Thank you, Chair Bergman and Ian Hegarty for the Philadelphia City Planning Commission. Members of the board, the comprehensive plan recommends no change to the existing RSA 5 zoning at this location.
however these lot proposed lot sizes are consistent with those on an adjoining row of
attached buildings on this block face so the city planning commission recommends that the
board grant the variance thank you mi 2021 005094 54 east pastoria street i vote yes with proviso no
roof decks or piled houses thomas holliman my vote is yes with proviso james snell yes with proviso
ishmael shaheed yes with proviso thank you thank you so much mi
2021-005-223-5844 Overbrook Avenue, RCO, Winfield Residence, Letter of Support, Vern Anastasio.
Mr. Anastasio is coming back in as a panelist.
good morning again mr chairman good morning you you've already been sworn just state your name
please sure verne it's verne anastasio a-n-a-s-t-a-s-i-o and before we go further could
you identify who your client is and the relationship to the property yep i'm representing
my client um owner occupant ms janet ames and her husband mr holliman has a few questions
good morning counselor good morning do you do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal
and stipulate to its accuracy i can according to our records you have submitted all
of the required documents is that correct that is correct please proceed
I want to stipulate to this, the accuracy of this particular refusal that just came in 3-15-22, that's today.
i want to stipulate to
There was an error in the one before you and the refusal before you, whereas the examiner said that we were proposing two feet wide for parcel B, when in fact, technically speaking, it should be 12 feet.
So I wanted to make sure that that was submitted for the record.
And I'm going to stop sharing this and pull up my binder.
this is this is a simple you know very straightforward relocation of lot lines
this is the property in question here's the primary residence on the lower part of the photo
the accessory dwelling unit in the rear portion of the photo and we have a plan to subdivide
so that my client who has made this large home her and her husband's home for many years
they are now getting on in age and can no longer bear the cost of upkeep what she'd like to do what
What she plans to do is subdivide the lot and then move into the rear accessory dwelling
unit and either lease or sell off the big house.
So that's that is the plan I'll share with you the actual plans of the property itself
as well as the subdivision plan which was um you see me counselor can you blow up enlarge
the site plan yep
there you go thank you you're quite welcome
The plan is to basically we'll have two proposed curb cuts.
One driveway will go to the accessory dwelling unit, I'm sorry, the small house with plenty of ample parking, and the second will go, will remain with the main house.
We have been refused for some small dimensional reasons.
And obviously, the reason why we're seeking this is for financial reasons.
The hardship is purely financial.
As they get on in age and retire, it's impossible to maintain the big house.
And that is appropriate.
Those hardships are appropriate when seeking dimensional variances.
The minimum side yard variance is de minimis, so I don't necessarily think that's an issue.
Parcel B variance, again, it's required 50, proposed 12 because of the driveway, but that's only on paper only.
The fact of the matter is the width of this vista stays the same. It's over 87 feet wide.
The reason why the 12 foot width issue comes into play is because we're creating a driveway for access to that rear structure.
But for all intents and purposes, the width of the vista stays identical.
The only changes are purely unseen and will be unnoticed.
So for that reason, we respectfully request the variance.
We've secured an overwhelming support of the neighbors.
And I will show you that now if I can. This is a 96 page exhibit packet. So excuse me while I.
Yep, we've got the RCOs and a letter of support. We also went to every neighbor surrounding the property and got unanimous support for the subdivision.
as other neighbors have and will continue to subdivide as well,
those that have large lots and two households on these lots as the owners get older.
on these lots. As the owners get older, they find it necessary in order to do that.
So with that, here's, by the way, the letter that went out to all the households. We had
23 immediate households that are impacted. And as my sheet shows, every one of them,
full support of the variance in addition to the RCO itself. Mr. Anastasio can I ask one question
would you mind pulling up the amended refusal again I think it needs the board needs to refer
to that in the decision if they should approve this and also if I could note that I was glad
to see that you had that corrected I wondered exactly what kind of property was two feet wide
but yeah yeah thank you yeah you're welcome uh okay well then i'm going to get out of my binder
and then because that's a separate doc okay
and this is the refusal dated 315. that's the one that uh we'll you know we we are uh
respectfully requesting the variance from again to avoid to avoid any confusion then if the board
should approve this it would be as per refusal date at 3 15 22 thank you sorry to have interrupted
that's okay and just in closing because we secured overwhelming support of all the neighbors because
the lot width is only 12 feet because of the width of the driveway when to the naked eye the
Vista's width remains unchanged at 87 because the side yard variance sought is de minimis in nature
because the back house is a pre-existing accessory dwelling unit and because the hardship is financial
which is permissible when appealing these sorts of dimensional variances I respectfully request
granting of this variance and with that I'm going to ask Ms. Janet Waymes to raise her hand and be
recognized. Ms. Ames, you may unmute yourself. Thank you. Good morning. Could you state your
name and spell for the court reporter? My name is Janet Ames, J-A-N-E-T, last name A-M as in Mary,
E-S as in Sam. Right. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but
the truth? Yes. Proceed. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Ms. Ames, did you hear my presentation today?
I did. Is it true and accurate to the best of your knowledge? Yes. And do you adopt it as your
own testimony? Yes. I thank you. I have nothing else, Mr. Chair. Questions from the board? No,
Mr. Chairman. No, Mr. Chairman. No, Mr. Chairman. Questions from the virtual audience?
I see no hands, Chair. Planning Commission?
Thank you, Chair Bergman. Ian Hegarty for the Philadelphia City Planning Commission.
Members of the board, the comprehensive plan recommends no change to the existing RSD-3 zoning
at this site. For dimensional variances, the code asks us to look at economic detriment and
consistency with surrounding neighborhood. We disagree with the stipulation that the
dimensional requirements of the code present an economic detriment to the applicant here
who may either sell or continue to live in the property regardless of this variance.
And further, we don't find that this type of configuration is a common condition in the
surrounding neighborhood. And so the city planning commission recommends that the board deny the
variance. Mr. Just respectfully, thank you, Ian, for the input. Again, the side yard is at the
minimus request, and the minimum lot width is invisible. And again, I think we've met our
burden with the financial hardship. She'd like to be able to stay at home, and she could only do
that if she's able to sell off one of the structures. Thank you. Thank you. Overwhelming
support from the neighbors by the way. MI 2021 005223 5844 over Brook Avenue the amended refusal
of 315-22 I vote yes. Thomas Holliman my vote is yes with the proviso. James Snell my vote is yes.
Ishmael Shahi, yes, we're provisor.
Oh, I apologize. My vote was yes, we're provisors.
Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Is there anyone in the virtual audience whose case has not been heard this morning?
this morning i see no handshare thank you everyone nice morning work thank you thank you mr chairman