provide density and a revitalization on a major commercial corridor. The commercial tenants
sought will be a fresh food grocer or a restaurant and we will have the ability to
subdivide the space if the community desires various units, various uses within that first
various uses within that first floor space.
floor space
At the community meeting, the community was very excited about the project and they were
particularly excited about the, that my client plans to have energy efficiencies within this
building. There'll be, it's going to be designed with some of the highest standards
and energy efficiency. My client is very much a proponent of solar and or other means of
providing energy and besides fossil fuels. So with that, the community was in favor
and I believe that the council person is in favor as well.
That's my understanding. Can we just show the site plan, Christine?
Thank you. This is the site plan for the property and then the floor plans are behind it.
So, you can see this is the first floor plan, second and third floor.
Next page is the fourth and fifth floors.
There will be a roof deck which will be accessible to and usable by all tenants of the building.
Trash will be stored in the property, but the units will have trash compactors to make sure that there is no problem with trash disposal.
And with that, is there anything else you need to know?
There is a public parking lot in the rear of the building, as well as ample street parking.
in the rear, which is Lex Street, and there will be a private dumpster and trash collection,
commercial trash collection. So, if there are any questions, I'd be more than happy to answer them.
Excuse me, this is Sharon Saleta. I checked and we did this afternoon receive an email from
um Andrew Goodman saying that Councilwoman Gauthier has no opposition thank you it's
I guess and do you have your client available yes uh my client is uh Meharry Bailey
Meharry are you evening sir when you get on please identify yourself with the record first
and last name spell your last name and I'll swear you in Meharry Bailey m-a-h-a-r-i last
name b-a-i-l-e-y we're from to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth yes
thank you miss gaston okay uh uh my harry uh will you um did you hear the testimony that i
just presented to the board yeah and i adopt your testimony as my own thank you thank you
questions from the board no no no anyone else would like to testify in this case please raise
your hand there's no hands at this time chair thank you planning commission
yes i just wanted to ask um miss gaston i believe that the rco is requesting a proviso
stating that the entire ground floor will be occupied by a commercial use. Do you have any
objection to that proviso? No, that's what we told them. Okay. They didn't say anything like that to
me, but we have no objection to that. That's what we were planning to do, and as you can see from
the plan, can we go back, Christine, to the first floor plan? You can see the first floor plan is
to use that entire space for as a commercial use and that's part of the revitalization for that
part of the commercial corridor that we presented to the RCOs. Thank you. Thank you. Planning
Commission. Yes. This property is indicated for neighborhood commercial mixed use on the city plan
Again, we recommend that the requested variance be granted.
We recommend that the requested variance be granted provided that final plan include
all commercial use on the first floor. Thank you. MI 2020-003391-4408
Lancaster Avenue. My vote is yes with the proviso. The entire first the first floor
is to be occupied by for uh by commercial use only
thank you um calendar number 3380 i'm sorry did we get the vote we didn't get the votes
my vote is yes too my vote is yes with proviso yes with proviso yes with proviso little delirious
today. Gosh. Okay, here we go. Calendar number 3380-230-36 Vine Street. The attorney is Michael
Matione. All right, before Michael begins, I just want to remind everyone, we suspect, I suspect
there's going to be a number of people who want to testify. We're not sure if we're going to finish
this case today depends on the amount of testimony and the number of people who want to be uh have
their voices heard we're going to accommodate everyone to the best of our ability i want to
understand that i i'm very familiar with this project i've received a number of emails over
the last two weeks which i did not respond to because i'm not permitted to so uh again we expect
a considerable amount of folks that want to testify we'll do our best to get this case heard
and voted on today if not we will have to continue it excuse me chair there's a procedural issue to
consider um mr anastasio is has submitted a motion to dismiss so the question is whether
you consider that first if we're going into the merits of the case or yes yes let's go with
Mr. Matiamy, do you have a position on that?
We obviously oppose the motion.
But as far as the sequence,
would you prefer to go forward?
I would rather hear the motion first
because if the board were to grant the motion,
then we don't have to have a hearing.
I mean, I think that that would be
an incorrect decision, obviously, but I think that-
Yeah, I think that's the right way to go.
And may I interrupt you?
Ms. Michael, can you put your name
and address on the record?
Sorry about that.
We forgot.
M-A-T-T-I-O-N-I, Federal Reserve Bank, 100 North Independence Mall, Suite 5A, Northwest, Philadelphia, 19106.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
Do you also agree to await the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Have you emailed the exhibit packet with proof of ownership, tax compliance, refusal, referral, photos, and plans five days in advance of this hearing, and have you met with the RCO, and do you have a letter?
It's yes to everything, except we never got a letter from the RCO, but they're here with counsel, and I don't think that a letter is necessary.
And we did submit a revised plan form and two pages of revised plans as well.
Okay, great.
so this is Sharon again I believe we did receive a letter and that was emailed to the board
along with a letter from Councilman Squilla this is Tanya um chair um and Sharon I just want to
note that um Harry Cook attorney has his hands up I don't know if you want him promoted now
or do you want to wait um I believe that Mr. Cook actually attorney is second chair is working with
me on this case so i would ask respectfully request that he be uh uh promoted as well
respectfully and this is sharon again just so the board knows because i don't believe that um
mr matty has had an opportunity to respond to the motion to dismiss you may hear that
hold it and go on with the merits if you would like to proceed that way
procedurally how would would you like me to to do the motion to dismiss first or
yes please okay well first are you going to be presenting this as mr cook weighing in because
why don't we get mr cook sworn in now okay mr attorney cook and i are are uh double teaming
on this case today. All right, Mr. Cook. Hello, Chairman. Please identify yourself. Sure. Harry
Cook, Anastasio Law, 1315 Walnut Street, Suite 1006, Philadelphia PA, 19107. Cook, COOK,
Cook, C-O-O-K, attorney for Ben Franklin North Neighbors Association.
attorney for Ben Franklin North.
You swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
I do, sir.
Thank you.
All right, Mr. Anastasio, please proceed.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I'll be brief.
First, I want to discuss my request for continuance because it's unusual for me for a request
for continuance to be denied without being proffered an opportunity to lay out the reasons
why. So I just want to do that briefly before I get into my motion. There are, I think,
three or maybe four reasons why I think this matter should be continued, and I'll be as
brief as I possibly can. First and foremost, my firm was just brought onto this effort
with the last few days. And we seek the courtesy of a continuance, basically on just
representation grounds so that we can adequately represent our clients in an efficient manner.
We literally received the appellant's package on Friday, just five days ago, after three o'clock in
the afternoon. So that kind of put us on our heels and sort of put us on a little bit of a
disadvantage. So I do want to ask for the continuance based on that. Number two, I'd
ask for the continuance based on just efficiency of time for this board. I think if we proceed
today, it may take hours and perhaps a resumption hearing. And that's a lot of time. I do believe
if we continue this case, and call me optimistic, but I think we might be able to reach an accord
so that we can return to you, and the hearing would be quick, expedited, and smooth sailing
for everyone. I want to make sure that I'm crystal clear. My clients want to work this out.
Now, third, this is the first listing of a relatively very large project, 70 plus units
on a relatively little residential street, which is 200 block of vine.
Projects half this size have taken more than one RCO meeting and even more than one zoning
board hearing.
In fact, just recently, our office has brought to you a matter of a three-family dwelling
on South Broad Street, we came down from a five-family, and after two RCO meetings
and presentation to this board, you had asked us, in your wisdom, to go back to the RCO again
to try and work something out, and we respectfully complied.
And Broad Street is easily the city's widest thoroughfare, smack dab between, you know,
subway station so and literally surrounded by other multi-family dwellings so for a project
of this size to proceed after just one single rco meeting without any follow-up and there was
absolutely no opportunity or effort on either side to try and come to an accord before we've
gotten involved really puts the whole process at a disadvantage. Finally, I have two clients on
Third Street that this project, the rear of the project abuts, and they received on Friday,
because I sent it to them, light and air and shadow studies that they have yet to be able
to get someone to actually review. And for all those reasons, I respectfully request
that continuance. I understand it's been denied. And the alternative, perhaps, I think we might
want to set up a special just so that we have the time to work this out amicably. But that's
all I have on that. I understand that you've already denied the request for the continuance.
i'm going to ask before i get into my vote before attorney cook gets into the motion to dismiss
uh if you would be willing to entertain a special on this because this could take some
a considerable amount of time sir i think we can all agree unless i'm misreading this
that we're going to have to resume this hearing at some point anyway uh but i have a couple
questions would you happen to know if your client did they have counsel before they retained you
It's my understanding that they thought they did, but they ultimately did not.
Explain that.
You know, I can't, I have not been given all the details on that.
They thought they may have had counsel, but I think counsel was conflicted out.
I can bring on the head of the RCO to speak to that further if you'd like.
I could bring on the head of the RCO to speak to that further if you'd like, but I don't think they had counsel to, at least to the level that I'm here.
Excuse me, Chair. We should probably allow Mr. Mattione to briefly reply to the continuance request.
Yeah, before you do that, I just want one other question. You suggested, Mr. Anastasio, that there might be some opportunity for some compromise.
Absolutely, 100%.
On behalf of your clients, have any of those issues or issue been made known to counsel for the applicant?
My clients tell me that they welcomed a negotiation at the one RCO meeting that was had. And based on my conversations with Mr. Mattione, who is an esteemed colleague, who I respect highly, and my clients, neither side seem to have gotten together over the past 90 days.
But that's only 90 days. I mean, I've got cases that have been going on for eight months, and we're still trying to work them out.
We're familiar with that. Okay. And I know you're familiar with that. Yes. Thank you. All right. Mr. Mattione.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Yes, we met with the RCO on January 7th.
We did follow up. I have followed up with some people involved with the RCO and some neighbors I know that live there.
Everybody told us that there was no compromise on the height of the building available.
The only compromise was that we had to reduce the height of the building.
and my client has been emphatic that he cannot reduce the height he already set back
the property at the top floor level so um with respect to compromise but with respect to
a continuance this matter you know my client's been carrying it for months now um three months
three and a half months waiting for this hearing the the rco had a great deal of time to retain
counsel and with all due respect to mr anastasio you know he was just retained but his client
sat on it and didn't do anything. Again, I respect Mr. Anastasio and appreciate where he is,
but it didn't stop him from finalizing two separate motions as well on this case.
We sent out the documents on Friday, which is the day that they're required to be sent out.
They're not required to be sent out any earlier. So we met with the time constraints for sending
out the documents to the Board, and I did send a copy to Mr. Anastasio the minute that I knew
he was involved in the case because I think that that's the proper thing to do even though the RCO
never sent us their letter. So it is a large project. We have been waiting a long time to get
to this board. We have reached out to various people in the community and nobody has ever said
that they were willing to do any kind of anything with us other than NUG. So, you know, when we got
that, we determined that we had to go forward and that's what we've done. I also do want to say one
thing, Mr. Anastasio, on one of his motions, I don't remember which one, the last document
he included was a letter from an architect, Ian Toner, who said that the shadow studies
were reviewed and that they found the shadow studies to be accurate that we had presented.
So that was in his documents and that's what he did submit to the board. It was on page 85 of his
materials. So I believe that holding this case today is the proper thing to do. My client has
been on the line for three hours like everybody else waiting for this case to be heard today.
we prepared for this long in advance we the rco had a long time to reach out to us they had a
long time to get counsel and my client would be prejudiced if this case were continued
because everybody knows about it and you know it's been here and we're ready to go
and i believe that there's no reason no justifiable reason to continue this case today
and i i guess if our calculations are correct it's going to be continued and that will give
put both parties an opportunity to talk
between today and whenever
the resumption hearing is
held. That's all we're looking
for. We're not going to continue.
I'm just saying you're going to have time.
This isn't going to be done in a half
hour. It's just not going to
happen that way. There will be
Both of you gentlemen have been
around long enough. You can figure out a way in which
you can all sit down and try to work things
i've communicated it back to my client and i believe uh you'll hear testimony at one point