Okay, now we have Darwin.
He's coming in as a panelist now.
darwin madam chair are you with seven eight it'll be 716 north shedwick street yes that's correct
that's okay can you put your name and address on the record and spell your last name
once again darwin beauvais that's b-e-a-u-v-a-i-s at dealworth paxton located at 1500 market street
suite 3500e um madam chair members you still are under oath but yes do you agree to wait the reading
of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy yes i do have you emailed the exhibit packet with
proof of ownership tax compliance refusal referral photos plans five days in advance of this hearing
and have you met with the rco and do you have a letter yes we have all of those all of those items
madam chair hi mr brother yes thank you madam chair members of the board it's always good to
be in front of you um and i asked the administrator if we can also identify frank rennie renner and
omri again for this matter uh 716 north shedwood street is located between mantua
avenue and north 35th street um just it just let me share my screen if i may
we here are all of our exhibits as listed that we submitted to the board and i would want to start
with the zoning map, which is 31. So, Mantua Avenue and North 35th Street, this location here,
this is the essence of our hardship, if you will. We're in a split zone district.
RSA-5 is controlling, and had we filed this application before the zoning change in 2017, this project would have been as of right.
So what we're looking, this entire block consists of 21 parcels, 11 of which are currently vacant.
Our proposal is for a three-story structure with five dwelling units.
The units range from a little bit over 600 square feet one bedroom to over 900 square feet for two bedrooms.
If you look at our exhibit packet for Section 15, which is 49, here are a list of permits on the block showing that the property,
property, surrounding properties are for multifamily. That's, that is for 717, five dwelling
units, 657. It's for multifamily, three dwelling units.
It's for multifamily three-dwelling units, 659 three-dwelling units, 661 has had a history for a two-family dwelling, three-family dwelling units.
There's first floor, one family, third floor, two family, 665, five family dwelling units, and 711 North 35th Street, two family dwelling units.
And we continue 721, 3-family, 723, 2-family, 727, 2-family, 729, 3-family, and the list goes on and on and on.
I'm trying to be brief, but I just want the board to know that we are looking at a multifamily block, and despite it being vacant.
So here's an aerial view of what we're talking about.
So the front half along here is zone RSA 5.
However, our lot goes all the way across.
So, and this, here is RM1.
And the properties, the permits that I showed you show mostly multifamily dwellings.
So here's another view of the area.
So another view. Again, our lot goes across. Our lot goes across.
us now with with that said i i i want to point out that this property this application was actually
in front of the board back in january 22nd 2020 we had several properties in that area
And when we met with the community, we did get support, which is at number 74.
We did get support for this property.
If you see here, it's 716 North Sedgwick.
We met on January 21st at 630 at the Chosen 300 Ministries.
uh all the members that were there for 716 Sedgwick uh seven supported four opposed the
reason was for parking however we did they did support our zoning change for for family uh for
multi-family at the time um here are properties of the here's photograph of the lot itself
And this is from the other side, a picture of our posting, our most recent posting.
and one of the reasons why we're before you today or is because we were the package that we submitted
in january of last year was uh was supported however there was a nearby neighbor or someone
who purported to be a nearby neighbor suggested that we that they were in opposition there was
a question by the chair as to whether or not we should meet with this neighbor we did try we did
agree to continue this portion we went forward with everything else and since then uh we haven't
been able to find this neighbor we we've tried and we've we've reached out we've made we made
overtures but we can't find this person we don't even know who this person is and so we posted the
property again in hopes that we would get another phone call in hopes that somebody will will reach
out and we haven't gotten that yet so with that with that said when it comes to when it comes to
the actual hardship we're submitting that this is just a use variance we're not asking for any
physical dimensions or anything like that the property has been blighted for a long time
and although that it was it this was part of uh the rezoning was part of a broad
broad omnibus remapping in Mantua, this was contemplated and it is clear by the surrounding
omnibus remapping in mantua that this
properties that multifamily does work here and would be consistent here. So with that,
we can go over the floor plans. And at this time, I would ask that if Frank Brenner would be
identified and let me just while i pull up the floor plans mr renner yes name and address please
you've already been sworn in frank renner last name r-e-n-n-e-r my address is 829 north 29th street
philadelphia pennsylvania uh 19130 thank you so frank can you walk us through starting from the
basement uh yes or you know what how about we do this starting from the front door that will be
the first floor uh the first floor is on the in the middle of the plan set there um there are uh
As mentioned, three stories in each apartment is one apartment in the front, one apartment in the rear for each for each for each floor.
In the basement, we have our living areas and actual bedrooms would be on the first floor.
There is a shared rear yard, which would be where our trash would be located.
located and um this would be and this property would also be managed by a commercial garbage
company that would take the trash out twice a week as as the other property um and i believe
uh mr bouvet mentioned two bedrooms we are only proposing one bedroom for each apartment
um and uh so yeah um because there is no alley at this location we have proposed uh two-way egress
um on the first floor here as you can see on the right uh and you would you would enter the
the upstairs apartments from the the central the central stairway as you can see um and then the
Yeah, the upper floors are fairly similar to each other.
And, again, these are one-bedroom units.
And with commercial trash pickup, how often will that be?
It would be twice a week.
Omri, will it be the same company that you normally use?
I'm sorry.
Could we acknowledge?
i'm not sure knowledge i'm not sure that omri is here but oh okay all right
but yes he is yes i'm here he gives me some music so
hi sir i'm sorry can you hear me now yes yes can you put your name and address on the record
So my name is Omri Shitrit, it is O-M-R-Y, and my last name is S-H-I-T as in Tom, R-I-T.
Thank you. You're already sworn in.
I already sworn in.
Okay. So we're going to use waste management as usual.
As of all our multifamily properties, they're going to take the trash twice a week.
Okay. So, and with that said, I would submit to the board that this is the least amount of variance that we're looking at, right?
You know, our proposal requests densities that currently exist there.
It's in line with the surrounding uses.
We will, this project will remediate the blight.
It's been an empty lot for several years.
And with that, we don't see any congestion to the area.
The properties have ample access to public transportation.
There is on-street parking.
We don't see any impairment to light or air because we're matching the same heights of the surrounding properties.
And with that, we believe we comply with the code.
Again, we did meet with the community last year.
We have their letter of support.
This was part of a omnibus package that we submitted to the board back in
This was part of an omnibus package that we submitted to the board back in January of last year.
And since then, we agreed to a continuance to try to find this amorphous neighbor.
But to no avail, we have it, and we're asking that the board continue their support of our overall project.
Omri, are you still on the line?
Yes, I am.
So everything that you heard, would you adopt that as your testimony?
Is there anything else you would like to add?
Not at the moment.
All right.
So with that, we just ask the board if there's any questions.
The three of us are here to help.
Does the board have any questions?
is there anyone in the virtual is there anyone in the virtual audience with questions
yes madam chair we have a daniel jones mr jones you can um unmute yourself hi there can you hear
me yes can you please put your name and address on the record and spell your last name sure it's
Danielle. I'm a girl. Danielle Jones. No problem. Danielle Jones. D-A-N-Y-E-L Jones. J-O-N-E-S. 724 North Shedwick Street. I am one of the residents on this block.
Thank you. Do you swear if I'm to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
Yes, ma'am.
Okay, you may continue.
So I've been living on this block for about five years now. This is a very narrow block.
Our main opposition and there had been some other neighbors that had been on the line but had to
jump off because of work commitments, etc. It's extremely narrow and our opposition is to the
density that this particular unit would bring. Almost all of the homes on this block are single
family homes. There is no multifamily on this particular block. There is something on the
corner of Mantua, which obviously it's a larger street, bigger breadth, can handle a lot more
volume, but our street cannot handle that. You know, I can appreciate the fact that, you know,
that the developer owns the block or owns the lot on the opposing block. And, you know, if
that street is wider, it's bigger, it can handle volume, this narrow street cannot handle that. We
or five units, you know, you figure one or even two people living in each of those units,
that is a burden on this on this block. We have had other people try to bring multifamily,
you know, on other little sections of this street and the board has recently opposed
those. So we are hoping that they are continuing in our favor to not move forward with this
particular project. I was in attendance to that initial meeting and had, you know, provided
my contact details to the developer and the representative. So I'm not sure if I was this
person that someone couldn't find because I actively come to these meetings. I'm a part of
this. And keeping this particular block, single family, is very important to myself and other
neighbors that are there. We are not opposed to filling in the gaps that are on that street,
but we want to keep it in line with what is in the space. And that is single family homes.
thank you i i if i may you know it's it's clear i and i showed the permits for the surrounding
area it in with all due respect it there's there's a ton of multi-family here as well on this block
particularly if i may ask that question i i'm looking at 632 north sedgwick not my block
i'm looking at no no interrupting please sorry sorry sorry and and what i also see
is that there's a ton of vacancy on the on the block so i i although i appreciate
what she's saying, but there's a ton of vacancy on that blog.
Let me go back to the Arial Views, and I just want to compare, just
by site, the street seems to be an average-sized street, although we can look at the site plan,
which is 26. If we have, let me just get closer.
it's a 30 foot right away so it it and i don't have what 35th street looks like but this is
if if anything they could be parking on one side of the street uh if if if that's not already
in existence. So I understand the issue about parking and that has been a common issue with a
lot of projects requiring or allowing for density, but honestly that wasn't one of our refusals.
again here's an aerial
again if you see the vacancy and again this is our lot and it goes across to this entire
block if you will okay we do have a letter from the 24th democratic ward it's a letter of support
planning commission. Thank you, Madam Chair. Ian Hegarty for the Philadelphia City Planning
Commission. In 2017, the zoning map was amended from RM1, blocked to a split of RM1 and RSA5.
And this was done in accordance with recommendations from the comprehensive plan
with the support of the community. We agree there are adjacent non-conforming uses, but we don't
believe that the applicant's hardship claim is supported with evidence of any kind of unique
physical circumstances or conditions of the property. It is, after all, a regular lot,
flat lot. The provisions of the zoning code, as you know, do not constitute hardship in the
criteria for the board nor do nearby non-conformities and nor does the condition of vacancy that is
being cited by council here. The applicant had the option to legally subdivide into two lots which
would allow for buy right redevelopment of multi-family uses on the 35th street side of
the property. However this building is situated on the Shedwick street side which was intentionally
left RSA 5 for all the reasons cited by the earlier testifier Ms. Jones and particularly
this is not an average size street it is a narrow street it's a 30 foot wide right of
way with a 14 foot wide cartway. So given the lack of hardship and inconsistency with
the adopted zoning map amendment made in accord with the comprehensive plan the City Planning
Commission recommends that the board deny this variance. And if I can just response
because I think the Planning Commission just made my hardship argument.
Planning is suggesting that we subdivide, right?
That's not a requirement in order to seek an as-of-right permit.
In order for you to get an as-of-right permit, we should subdivide.
Our lot goes across the way, and we're in a catch-22.
We can comply with RSA 5 here, but then we'll be non-conforming here.
And what we're asking is that we comply with RM 1 and we can then still be able to not create as much conflict with what is already there in the neighborhood.
So I appreciate the Planning Commission suggesting that there isn't a hardship, but his own statement said we will have to, we could subdivide in order to create a compliant project.
So, and with respect to the street, he mentioned that the cartway is 14 feet.
uh street uh he mentioned that the cartway is 14 feet i believe our site plan suggests that
it's 16 feet if we can just go back to our zoning site plan um let's just go
So, if you can see here, it's a 30-foot right-of-way with a 7-foot sidewalk on one side, a 16-foot cartway, and a 7-foot walkway on the other side.
So, Anne, given the aerial that I just showed.
I think we got it.
I think we got it.
madam vice chair yes may i um we have uh um andrew goodman that would like to put something yes yes
mr goodman good afternoon hi name and address for the record please and spell your last name
andrew goodman g-o-o-d-m-a-n here representing the office of third district council member jamie
gaudier room 586 city hall okay thank you madam chair members of the board our office opposes the
variance requested and asks the board to deny the variance for the same reasons already identified
by near neighbors as well as the planning commission testimony um we also want to provide
i guess a little more clarification on missed on what miss jones was referencing since applicants