Did you hear my testimony now regarding your property on Welsh Road? Yes, I did. Do you have
the car pictures? I don't know if the board needs to see the vehicle being smashed up, but you can
briefly find out the danger posed at this corner here. Briefly, briefly, please.
would you just tell the board? Yeah, they even put a stop sign there. We really was talking
about getting speed bumps. Cars come down shiply and it's just bad. People's car, my car got hit
one night at 3.30 in the morning. They hit my car, ran that corner right there. See how the tree is
tilted? The brown stuff at the bottom of that pole was from a car hitting it. People can't even park
around the corner that's how bad it is right there you see the stop sign on your right hand
they don't stop no one stops and that's a real I didn't know when I brought the house that the
intersection was that bad it's a real bad and I had I moved my car because I was just shocked
how fast they come down there and they tore my car up I wasn't even there a year
okay I have nothing further to add questions from the board
No, Mr. Chairman.
No, Mr. Chairman.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
Chair, I see no hands at this time.
Hi, Planning Commission.
Thank you, Chair. Sarah Bond, Philadelphia City Planning Commission.
The comprehensive plan recommends no change to the existing residential single-family zoning.
The appellant has not supported their hardship claim with evidence of unique physical circumstances or conditions of the property.
The City Planning Commission recommends that the board deny the variance.
Thank you.
M-I-2022-005-970-2797, Welsh Road.
I vote yes.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes.
James Snell, my vote is yes.
Blishmael Shahid, my vote is yes.
Thank you, board.
Thank you.
We're going to go to number nine.
MI 2022-006-005-310 West Queen Lane. Michael McKillney is the attorney. There is a letter
of support from the FAIF CDC with provisions and letter of support from, or letter of non-opposition,
I'm sorry, from Solo Germantown.
They also have provisions.
Chair, Mr. McElhaney is coming back in as a panelist now.
Good morning, Mr. Chairman.
Good morning.
Could you identify your client, please, in relationship to the property?
My client is Mazaltov, M-A-Z-A-L-T-O-V, Development LLC.
Gary Murray Jr. is the member of the LLC.
All right. And our our vice chair has just a few questions for you.
all right and our our vice chair has just a few questions for you good morning counsel do you
agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to his accuracy i do have you emailed
in all the required documents and exhibits to proceed with this case five days in advance of
this hearing yes i have thank you please proceed and share your screen
There it goes.
Apologies for the delay.
Here we go.
Mr. Chairman, can you see the index on the screen?
We can.
Excellent.
My name is Michael McElhenney, M-C-I-L-H-I-N-N-E-Y, with the Law Office of Orphanities and Toner,
here on behalf of the owner of Mazel Tov Development.
As a preliminary matter, members of the board, we have at a pre-marked exhibit packet,
Exhibit 9 is our ZBA appeal.
Exhibit 10 shows just the property was posted with zoning notices and the community meeting
notices.
Exhibit 11 is the 14303 notices.
We did meet with the RCOs twice, January 12, 2023, and February 21, 2023.
23. My client's deed is at Exhibit 12 and the tax report showing all taxes that are currently due
have been paid. And actually, as of yesterday, all the taxes have been paid. As Mr. Chairman
referenced, we do have a letter of support from the coordinating RCO that's at Exhibit 1. And a
second RCO sent a letter of non-opposition with some provisos. Exhibit 2 is the refusal for the
subject property. My client is proposing to erect an attached building with a roof deck, roof deck
access structure, a three-story building for single family use. And we are requesting an
off-street parking garage at the rear of the property for one car parking and with a second
store for storage. The property is zoned RSA 3, which creates dimensional and use refusals based
off our plan the garage that we're proposing is 19 feet high whereas the code by right is 10 feet
the rear yard depth is 15 feet our proposed is zero we're building back by the rear property line
and third we are attaching to the neighboring building to the south of us as this building's
property 16 feet wide an 18 foot side yard will be impossible
exhibit three is the aerial map the zoning map and then an aerial map or two
The property is zoned RSA 3, which is on the east side of West Queen Lane.
We are surrounded by RSA 5 to the north, RM 1, RM 4, and CMX 2.5 across the street, and then CMX 2.5 to the south of us.
Photograph 2 of Exhibit 3 is just orienting the board across the street from our property is a PHA development, and the middle ground of open space is actually cemetery ground.
And the third photograph, this is a photograph showing aerial map with the deed lines. And the reason I included this is our property is 310 West Queen Lane. Most of the properties are rectangular in nature. One thing that's unique here is 312 Queen Lane is rectangular.
But at the end, behind 310, there's actually a 15 by 15 foot area that will never be built on by 312.
It's not really buildable. It will create a buffer space between our garage that we're proposing at the rear and 308's garage that's at the rear of its property line.
Photograph four is showing the other properties on this block of West Queen Lane that are that have rear garages, properties at the rear of Pulaski Street.
at the rear of Hansberry Street to the east, Morris Street to the south, it's common for the
properties in this block in this area to have rear garages that are at the rear property lines as we
are proposing with our project. Photograph four or exhibit four is just an aerial view, a 3D view
showing the neighboring properties, John B. Kelly School to the east, Germantown Cricket to the east
as well, and the PHA housing development opposite our property. I'll jump to Exhibit 5, which are
photos of the subject property in block. We are the vacant lot in the middle of the screen to the
left of the White House. To the left of our property is a cobblestone curb cut and driveway,
and that's a common access drive for 308 to the left of us and 310, which is our property.
The properties to the going north are residential buildings and then commercial at the corner, three-story structures.
North are residential buildings and then commercial at the corner, three-story structures.
And to the east of us, looking at page three, are residential properties, none of which have these, the neighboring properties don't have an eight-foot side yard similar to what we cannot have.
Going south on the block are just other residential houses, all of which have off-street parking as we are requesting with our property.
at the farther south southern end we have single family houses and abandoned and abandoned house
and then at the far end of the block at marsh street we do have a new construction condo
apartment building that property zone cmx 2.5 and then resident apartment buildings and a chinese
restaurant the properties on the west side of the property are residential in nature three-story
and two-story structures and directly opposite our property is the PHA development that I referenced
and I took a photo at page eight just showing the on-street parking availability but we are
proposing off-street parking similar to the other properties on this block and area of the Germantown
area. I did take a photo of the screenshot of the potter's field the burial ground across the street
from us. And to the north is just other PHA properties and the commercial properties at
the corner. Moving on to exhibit six, which is our site plan. The proposal is for, the property
itself is 16 feet wide. It's 130 feet deep, 130 and seven inches deep. The front of the property,
I'm going to zoom in for the zoning table. The front yard's an eight foot minimum required. We
have a 20 foot front yard. We're matching the property we are attaching to, to the south.
We will have a steps walking up to a recessed entryway. The property will be a three story
with a roof deck and it'll be approximately 33 feet tall. They're under 34 feet tall.
i did reference that common driveway between 310 our property and 308 that's evidenced on the
the zoning plan at the rear of the property we end up with a 44 feet seven inch open space rear yard
part of which will have pavers or paved so allow the car to come in and out of the rear garage
and at the very rear we're proposing the garage structure that'll be approximately 19 feet tall
it's 20 feet deep 16 feet wide for one car parking and as i mentioned before behind our property
the 312 west queen lane has a 15 by 15 foot segment that buffers our property with the
neighbor's property at 308 that has the big rear garage at the back of the property
turning to the elevation just showing the three-story structure
with a mansard roof in the front and the pilot house towards the back which makes it
not as visible from the street and for the garage we made clear to the neighbors and as on our plan
the ground floor is store is for the car the upper level will be just a storage space non
non-living space, which was one of the provisos from the RCO. They do not want that to be living
space. Exhibit seven is a rendering of the proposed structure. We're proposing red brick
building, as Mr. Murray has done on his other properties, with that mansard roof on the front,
sloping and creating an eased transition into the roof deck.
and the third photograph of page three of this exhibit just shows the proposed second story
garage at the rear of the property and as I mentioned on the front we're matching the
front property lines of the building we are attaching to the side yard of eight feet as I
mentioned is not possible here where the property is 16 feet wide you would be left with an eight
foot lot to build on with and that's not that's not possible as far as the layout looking at page
two of exhibit seven we are proposing a four bedroom three and a half bath building uh the
community did request no bedrooms in the basement as part of this we do not have a basement so that's
not an issue here um the proposed ground floor is currently set up with one bedroom and a bath
it's designed as the conceptually the client was looking to do a house where a in-law or a parent
could live with the family, but the lower level could be an office, a den, or other use.
But it's really designed to have full living space, bedroom, bathroom, living room for an
older individual as part of the family to live at the property because it is a large house that's
because it is a large house that's being proposed. The upper level at the second floor is one
being proposed. The upper level at the second floor is one bedroom.
bedroom, full kitchen, living room, half bath, and then the third floor is a bedroom, two baths,
and a master bedroom at the front of the property, and then access to that roof deck.
At Exhibit 8, I just included historic photos of the house that used to be at the property.
at 310 West Queen there was a house and the rear of the property was used for
parking along with 308 that both properties use that common drive to access the rear rear of the
property in the rear garages and the last exhibit was just a Sanborn map just showing the common
drive between the properties and the garages that are at the rear of the property I'd submit to the
board that this with the support of the community a single family house at this property at this
location with the rear off street parking where there's an existing curb cut and common driveway
is a acceptable use it brings cars off the street does not have any detriment to the community and
in fact is a betterment of the community that is seeking more single-family houses
in this neighborhood with that members of the board I can answer any questions that
may be or have my client come on to adopt my testimony or answer any additional questions
you're okay with the provisos so the provisos from solo germantown we're we cannot do grass
in the front yard because part of my client listen i'm fine okay i have interior trash storage
no sleep and accommodation on ground floor and no household living in garage
yes we're okay with those we have trash inside because especially with the rear garage we can
store trash in the in the garage if necessary separate from the house all right could you
bring your client on mr murray could you please raise your hand
mr murray please unmute yourself and wait for the chair
hi mr murray could you state your name please and spell for the court reporter
Mr. Murray you have to unmute yourself
Mr. Murray
counsel you're an officer of the court we'll take your uh testimony um questions from the board
no mr chairman no mr jim questions or comments from the virtual audience
Chair, we have Allison Weiss with her hand up.
Ms. Weiss, please unmute yourself and wait for the chair.
Good morning, Ms. Weiss.
Could you state your name, please, and spell it for the court reporter?
Yes, thank you.
Allison Weiss, A-double-L-I-S-O-N-W-E-I-S-S, Solo Germantown Civic Association.
You swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Proceed.
Uh, yes, I am quite puzzled by the fact that they cannot do grass in the front area, because that was a large part of the discussion at the meeting was greening the areas at that site.
So I don't understand why there is no provision to add a front lawn.
So we want to comment on that.
Yeah, and it's not that they can't do grass in the future. We don't want to commit to that, especially with the ground floor being proposed for an elderly person to be living there. We might have to install ramps for a future owner, and we need the access and availability of those options.
If grass is required, that could prohibit who could live in that front unit or change the design.
that there was a large discussion at the meeting about how a disabled person would enter and we
were told that the side and the rear had a same there was no need for a step in the rear elevation
or the side so that the person was able to access the property in that manner not having to use the
front as an entrance. So we're a little confused. That is correct that the rear could have an
access that's ground level or a sloped ramp, but I don't think it would be proper to have
an elderly person or handicapped or whomever might be in that first unit to force them to
to force them to only use the rear entrance.
only use the rear entrance. I just don't understand.
I just don't understand why that didn't come up at the meeting when we discussed it at length.
It did.
No, it did not.
We were told very clearly that the access could be in the rear and that grass could be installed in the front,
because they talked about having a cement patio in the front.
and we said we would prefer to have more greenery and there was like i said there was a long
discussion about how a person could enter that property without having a ramp and that there
was the entrance in the rear of the property that was at the same level and it entered right into
the apartment of the well it's not even an apartment it's a it's a room in that house
So if there's some plan for a future time to turn that into a multifamily, then we need to address that now.
There is no multifamily application as part of this proposal.
It's a single family use as requested by your community group extensively over the years.
The commitment of a proviso of grass in the front was not agreed to.
Could it be installed in the future?
It could be, but the client needs options for accessibility and viability of the property while giving the community what they want, which is a nice single-family house.
Well, it's going to be very difficult to install grass over concrete.