Pico, I'm the chair of the zoning board of adjustment. We have a quorum. I'm officially
calling this session to order. In attendance is our board secretary, Mr. Confessor Plaza,
and our board member, Mr. Thomas Holloman. As you're probably aware, today is our, I believe,
fifth or sixth day of holding virtual hearings. In addition to the board members, we have our
city solicitor, Sharon Saleta, who will be joining us shortly, and our board administrator,
Ms. Tanya Sunken. While we may have to make some adjustments along the way, our plan is to call
each case and basically proceed as we would have in a live hearing. We ask that attorneys for the
applicants or other interested parties identify themselves for the record when the case you'll
be participating is called. We will then hear the appellant's presentation,
followed by any presentation by attorneys representing other parties
excuse me by representing other parties interested parties and members of the public
not represented by council will then be given an opportunity to testify we will finally then hear
from the recommend the recommendation from the planning commission at the hearing's conclusion
the board will either vote the matter immediately or hold it for discussion in executive session
the record will then be closed at that time and any decision uh that is made in the executive
session will be made in the executive session a week from tomorrow i don't have the date
um wednesday somebody can help me i'll have my calendar wednesday
we have a date for next wednesday yes sure august 5th august 5th yes thank you so that the the vote
will either take place immediately or we help be held for discussion in the executive session
that follow next Wednesday, August the 5th.
At the hearing's conclusion, I already read that part.
Any case held for discussion will be voted on August 5th.
A couple of changes related to the virtual format.
First, we will be administering oaths
to individual participants prior to their testimony
rather than to the room as a whole, since there is no room.
Second, for the benefit of anyone participating
by phone, we ask that the attorneys and witnesses identify themselves prior to speaking or
testifying. Third, we'd like to advise everyone that this proceeding is being recorded and that
by participating, you acknowledge your agreement to be recorded. If anyone wishes to testify,
please make sure you raise your hand so that we can know who was testifying on which case.
and I would ask the attorneys, please limit your testimony to those issues that are absolutely
necessary for you to establish a record. We will do our best to hear your case thoroughly,
but we're going to limit the case to one hour. It is impossible for us to continue to have cases
that are lasting two hours or more. So we're going to limit your case to one. And again,
please summarize and speak to those issues that are most important to
establish your record I believe I covered everything Sharon and or Tanya
anything else add so chair if I could add that all those participating by
phone if you wish to testify and be recognized you must press star 9 that
will raise your hand and then we'll be able to see that you wish to testify for any particular case
and then also those who would like to put in a parent statement you can leave a message
on a google line that we have available and that number is 267-270-5548 and you can call that line
and put in your apparent statement, and we will get the information and make sure you state what
case you're putting in a parent statement for, and you would be a party to that case. Thank you,
Chair. I have one request as well, and it seems that there was one case that was mistakenly added
to the Continuance Lips 307 Friendship. They are actually prepared to go forward, so if we could
add that to the list, please. Thank you. Professor, you were going to ask something? Yeah, those that
want to uh testify whether in support or in opposition make sure it's something new and
different okay i think that's it thank you you got it okay i think we're ready ready to go
okay uh these are for the continuance and withdrawals uh don't have a calendar number
These are for the continuance and withdrawals.
Don't have a calendar number, but address 230 South 4th Street is being withdrawn.
Calendar number 39149-2340 Orthodox is being continued.
Calendar number 39130-240 North 29th Street is being continued.
Calendar number 39341-3019 West Dolphin Street is being continued.
Also, calendar number 39277-6415 Harbinson, it's being continued.
I think we are ready to roll.
Okay, thank you.
You're welcome.
calendar number three nine six six zero one oh seven Kahlo Hill Street Michael
We'll fill it.
hello yes good morning isaac are you the attorney for this case
uh good morning good morning good morning members of the board isaac slepner uh with
matioti limited um for the uh applicant stephen maffay on 107 callowhill street
morning sir you agree to wait the reading of his refusal and stipulate to its accuracy
Yes, I do.
Mr. Slepner, please identify yourself with the record.
Spell your name.
And do you swear and affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Thank you.
Isaac, I-S-A-A-C, last name Slepner, S as in Sam, L as in Larry, E as in Elvis, P as
in Peter, N as in Norman, E as in Elvis, R as in Robert, Slepner, Mattione Limited,
100 North Independence Mall West, Suite 5A Northwest, Philadelphia PA 19106, for the
appellant applicant, Stephen Maffay, property owner, developer, Stephen Maffay.
And my client, Stephen Maffay, is here with me somewhere.
Stephen, are you there?
I think he's here somewhere.
He was texting me.
He said he was here.
can he raise his hand okay i see it there we go yeah i don't know oh why don't you proceed and
we'll get to your client um thank you uh good morning mr chair members of the board uh everyone
again i'm isaac slepner i'm counsel for uh the property owner stephen maffay and if uh you would
allow me to walk you through my documents, I will let you know what we have going on today.
So I will call your attention to this PDF that I have pulled up on everybody's screen. Can
everybody see that? Yes. It's a table of contents and we're just going to scroll through. Okay, so
our first, I'll go slowly through the table of contents if you want and then I'll just kind of
start well if there's something really important that we need to see in that table fine if not and
go to whatever the issue i'll jump right into it um all right exhibit one is our notice of refusal
it's uh proposed is a single family dwelling in a um the property is split between an rm1 and a
cmx4 but in any event it's uh a single family dwelling proposed um seeking a variance for height
and seeking a variance for use, and also a proposed parking space
not accessed by a shared rear alley, shared driveway or rear street.
Exhibit 2 is our time-stamped application for appeal,
which you can't really see the time stamp, but it was from January 13th of 2020.
Exhibit 3 is our plan, our site plan.
I'm going to turn that around so that everybody can see that.
um can everybody see that i can expand it a little bit if we need um to the left there is a site plan
above are some sketches that's an area map and then those two photographs are photos
of the current uh sorry the current situation at the property
um the property is that vacant lot there where
The property is that vacant lot there where that brown fence is, and you'll see some more photos of the property.
If you need, I can zoom in on this a little bit if that's any help.
All right.
So I'll scroll down to Exhibit 4.
Exhibit 4 are the floor plans for the single-family residence.
It's a large single-family residence, and this property abuts I-95.
It kind of is right at Callow Hill Street, right between front and second,
right where Callow Hill is about to dip under the 95 overpass.
So it's a little bit of an oddly shaped and sized property,
and for a very long time it's been vacant.
These are the floor plans that my client plans to build at the property.
I'll scroll over here to the left.
It's a basement, ground floor, second floor, third floor, fourth floor, and a roof deck.
So it's going to be a pretty sizable property with a garage at the front, fronting onto Callow Hill.
There's already a curb cut there.
Exhibit 5 is the elevation, and you'll see there's elevations from all the directions, south, north, west, and east.
It's got some pretty sizable windows on the front, a lot of windows on the east side,
the east side being closer to the front.
107 is my client's property.
105, Calo Hill is also vacant.
So there's a number of windows out onto what will still be a vacant property,
but will be arguably better lighted and better looked after once this is built.
Exhibit 6 are some renderings.
So you can kind of see, get more of an idea of what it'll look like when it's finished.
You can see in that first rendering there, that's 103 through, I guess I would say 101 or 99 Callow Hill.
And then in between there, that empty is 105, and then ours is 107.
And then there's some more renderings.
Okay, we'll scroll down, Exhibit 7, 7A.
These are, well, 7A is a map of the area, so you can kind of see a little bit better how this property fits into the neighborhood.
So there's 107, which is ours, highlighted in blue, and as you can see, it's kind of narrow and very deep.
It goes almost all the way back to the on-ramp of 95, and it's kind of a T-shape at the rear of the property, and then 105 is vacant, 103 is another building.
um exhibit 7b is that's a photograph if you see that chain link right there
um that chain link to the left there that left half is 107 the right half is 105
um and then above you can see the ramp of 95 the next photograph i'll turn this again so everybody
can see this a little uh see this the way it's meant to be seen uh if you see this fence that
says national on it that's 107 this fence that's all overgrown that's 105 and then the building is
103. um here's another view uh of it i'll turn that counterclockwise again you can see 107 105
and 103.
And then, well,
I was going up, not down.
And then I guess that's a close-up
of it is the next one.
That's a close-up.
That's 107.
And this is just a view
down Callow Hill Street
to kind of
show everybody what the view looks like.
This is from front
and Callow Hill looking west
on Callow Hill.
And there you can see the building, the last building there, and the ramp.
And in between, you can't see much because it's vacant right now.
But the second property in is 107.
All right.
Exhibit 7C.
These are the photographs of our orange signs that were posted on July 14th.
That's our orange poster.
And our notice of refusal.
That's photo one.
Here's photo two.
You can see it's on the fence in front of 107 Callowhill and photo three.
That's also on the fence of 107 Callowhill. Here's exhibit eight.
Exhibit eight is our project information form.
I can scroll through that. If anybody wants to read it, they can. I'll go back.
We did have a meeting with the RCO.
We did have a meeting with the RCO.
Our RCO letter is Exhibit 11, and I can go through these a little bit more quickly.
Our RCO letter is...
This was our certificate of mailing from our original letter, which had been sent out on January 24th,
and this is about 10 pages because there were a lot of addresses.
Exhibit 9B is a certificate of mailing.
We more recently sent out a notice on July 21st when we finally got the date for today.
um following that will be our uh certificates of our affidavits of service this one is from
january uh from january 31st that we did the mailing on january 24th that's a copy of the
letter there's a copy of our refusal that's the address list 10b is an affidavit of service
notice that we did in July of an updated notice to the neighbors.
Exhibit B, these are the addresses that were sent to.
Here's Exhibit 11, is a letter from Northern Liberty's neighbors of May 3.
And this is a letter in favor from the NLNA board,
from the meeting of the RCO on February 24.
forth. So that's exhibit 11 of our packet. And then I'll point out that our application
today for a variance is for a single family use in a half RM1, half CMX4, not exactly
half and half, but part CMX4, part RM1, and we're applying for a variance for a single
residents with a front garage. I would point out that previous prior to this
the board had granted a variance for a multi-unit multi-family household for a
five dwelling unit building that was never built but that was proposed back
in 2015 and this is the zoning and use permit from that date in the past so
what we're seeking now is a lot less of a a lot less dense and a lot less of a
variance from the code at this point this was our refusal from 2015 exhibit
13 is a deed in favor of my client Stephen Maffei recorded in 2013 was when
he purchased the property that's the deed exhibit uh there's his tax cert exhibit 14 is a letter
from council member squilla's office stating that the councilman is in favor uh is in non-opposition
i should not misquote him um is in non-opposition of the variance and 15 exhibit 15 we had been
having trouble with the city tax cert site but we ran a search on abitair design studio and on
the property 107 Callowhill Street. And it looks like there are zero tax balances going back to
2001. So those are my exhibits. And Steve, are you there? Steve Maffei? Yes, I am. I don't know
if you can hear me, but I'm here. Yes. Steve, we can hear you. This is Frank DiCicco. Would you
please identify yourself for the record and spell your name for the stenographer? Sure. Good morning,
members of the board. My name is Stephen. S-T-E-P-H-E-N. Last name Maffei. M is in Mark. A is in
Apple. F is in Frank. F is in Frank. E is in Edward. I is in Indigo. Thank you, Stephen. Do you
swear and affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? I do. Please
proceed. Mr. Maffei, did you hear all the testimony I offered to the board today? Yes, I did. And
would you adopt that testimony as though it were your own? I will. And did you have anything else
you wanted to add um nothing really other than uh like you had mentioned the building actually
is 20 foot lower we were going in for a 65 foot structure back when and we did reduce it like you
had said from a five unit building to a single family uh with four stories and 45 feet so i just
wanted to you know let that be known thank you anymore any other mr. Slepner
have you concluded I have concluded I have nothing further at this time thank
you is there anyone else who wishes to testify on this matter if so please raise
your hand I have no one chair thank you any questions from the board
planning commission
good morning this property is indicated for residential use on the comprehensive plan
the applicant is requesting front-loading parking on a block face that has no other curb cuts
and has permitted parking on that block face accordingly we feel that the front-loaded
Accordingly, we feel that the front-loaded parking should not be approved.
parking should not be approved thank you
Thank you.
Calendar number 39660, 107 Callahill Street.
My vote is yes.
My vote is yes.
My vote is yes.
Good luck.
All right.
Thank you.
Calendar number 39368, 1108 Siegel Street.
Confess, what was that address again?
Good morning, Steve.
You agree to waive the reading of his refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Yes, I do.
Thank you. Name an address for the record.
My name is Steve Bertil from Claire Harrison, Harvey, and Bransburg.
Here on behalf of my colleague Stephanie Boggs, who was double booked.
She has a historical commission meeting.
The address we're here to present for is 1108 to 12 Siegel Street, S-I-G-E-L.
With me, I have...
Steve, would you please spell your name for the record?
Sure. It's Steve Bertil, B-E-R-T-I-L.
And do you swear and affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Thank you, Steve, and please proceed.
Thank you.
Good morning, Mr. Chair and members of the board.
As I stated, my name is Steve Bertil, and we're here to represent on 1108-12 Siegel Street.
With me, I have our architect and designer, Timothy Koerner, and the owner of the property, Mark Bon Giovanni.
I don't know if they raised their hands already, but I'll just get started and then allow Tanya to find them.
As I said, we're here for 1108 to 12 Segal Street.
We are here to request a variance, approval for the demolition of an existing garage structure
and a new construction of a four-story structure with a green roof and a roof deck for use
as a six-multi-family residential dwelling unit with four accessory interior off-street
parking spaces and 11 bicycle spaces.
We're seeking approval with the proviso language outlined in our revised proviso plan and the
changes submitted with the revised plans.
So if I'm going to share my screen here, let's share the PDF.
Is everyone able to see the PDF of the exhibit packet?
I'm going to jump around to the exhibits that are relevant to the substantive issue
at hand for the variances that we're seeking, but I'll just state on the offset that within
the exhibit packet, we've met all the procedural and notice requirements, and I'll get into the
specifics regarding meetings with the registered community organization a little bit later in my
presentation. So just to provide context and background on the property, the subject property
of 1108 Segal Street is designated as CMX2, Neighborhood Commercial Mixed Use. As you can
see, this highlighted portion of the map is where the property lies. The Segal Street
is located off 11th Street between McClellan Street to the north and Mifflin Street to
south the property is an existing one-story garage it's a map of the
location here and here's an aerial over the street here I'm not sure if you can
see my mouse but the area of the street so as I said the property is an existing
one-story garage and is utilized as such. This is a photo of the exterior facing Segal Street.
And the property is also essentially sandwiched between two other garages and
in fact the entire street is essentially all garage access.
So this is a photo of it looking up Segal Street, or I'm sorry, down Segal Street.
And this is from the corner of Segal and 11th, which you would have to enter to get to look down the street here.
So, as I stated, the property is designated as CMX2.
The proposed development is designed to the CMX2 standard to meet the intent and purpose
of the code.
I'm going to flip to Tab 8, so we're going to start with the proposed development.
Tab 8B specifically, we included both the original plans on Tab 8A and Tab 8B are the
revised plans.
So we're going to flip to Tab, the members of the board wants to flip to Tab 8B if you
uh for those who don't can't see the screen
so as i said the the plans include the demolition of the existing garage and the construction of a
four-story structure with a green roof, a roof deck, and roof deck access
structure for use of six multi-family residential dwellings and four
interior parking spaces and 11 bicycle spaces. The lot area of the subject
parcel is 2,398 square feet. Under the code by right, four units would be
allowable by right. We were actually just two square feet shy of being
allowed five units by right. In addition to the two square feet, to being shy two square feet,
we're including in the project a green roof, which under the code would allow an increased
density of 25% for housing density. When you consider that calculation, the allowable by
right units would be five units and we would actually at that point only be one
square foot shy of the six units we were requesting under the variance so
technically speaking because the building is under 5,000 square feet we
do not technically qualify for the green roof bonus but nonetheless we are
including the green roof on this project to all the requirements and all the
requirements that are outlined to obtain the green bonus. In addition to that, we
are including interior parking, although no parking is required for this project
or this parcel, we're including the parking nonetheless. So just to give you a
sense, this is the exterior front face of the structure and as you can see
is the garage park racing garage and four units there here is a color
rendering of what the project will look like along the Segal Street it is sort
of an aerial view as you can see the the green roof in addition to the setback
roof deck in the middle of the project and you can see it within the context of
the existing, excuse me, of the existing three. So we met with the registered community organization
twice, initially in January 13th of 2020, then again in February 12th, excuse me, February
10th of 2020. Between the meetings, we made some changes in response to comments in the
shadow study that was conducted. The roof deck was reconfigured to be set back from the building line
to, one, to be set back from the building line, but also to create an extended green roof. So we
have green roof on both sides instead of extending the deck to the roof line. In addition to that,
the height of the parapet was lower to reduce the height of the mass of the building. And in terms
of the floor plan some of the comments we received was to include a wash and dryer closet in each
unit and we adjusted the units all the units to do that as you can see here the wd
After the second meeting, and I'll jump to the letter, there was a vote convened where
after the second meeting i'll jump to the letter
the community attendees voted to support the project.
And again, I'm not sure if you guys can see my mouse moving, but I'm circling where that
yeah we can see it okay I can see it anyway okay so in terms of very free the
refusal I'm just go back to the rendering in terms of the refusals that
were issued currently there are five refusals the first is the amount of
residential units permitted there are four residential units permitted as I
stated earlier but we're requesting what we believe is a de minimis request of six requested
units because of the design and the inclusion of the green roof which satisfies the language for
the green roof bonus but also because we're we're so we were the amount of square footage that we
were off to get the increase unit was um so minuscule that we believe that it's not it's
de minimis variance request. In addition to the units, there's a zoning designation as a max
occupied area of 75 percent. Currently, as the current condition on the property and all the
units, or excuse me, all the lots on that street, it's currently 100 percent of occupied area on
the lots and so we would essentially just not be changing the condition we
will be maintaining that a hundred percent occupied area on the lot on the
base level and when you get up to the occupied areas in the upper floors we
are actually reducing it back to 80 percent in addition to that we have a
refusal for the max height in the zoning designation the maximum height is 38
feet we are proposing 51.6 feet there are actually two reasons for the increased
height one is to provide the accessory parking in addition to that the on the
roof we have two pilot houses that trigger the variance because if it was
the one pilot house it would not be included in the height measurements but
under the International Building Code, two means of egress are required from an
occupied roof of a multifamily residence and as such we have to have the two
pilot houses up there and therefore that if they have thus been included in the
height measurement. The max height of the primary residence is actually 41 feet
six inches so we're actually in terms of the primary residence in the primary
bulking we're actually only about three feet um away from the map site the next refusal is the
roof deck setback from seagull street so there's a five foot uh setbacks required um and under our
proposed project uh and under the language of code we technically have zero um feet proposed
but that's because we would like to maximize the green roof area and the green roof area is
calculated within the roof deck setback even though the roof deck area is
actually in the middle of the roof and it's and it's uh
it's sandwiched by roof uh green roof on both sides
and lastly uh the refusal is under the cmx2 designation typically
the ground use floor is required to be designated for
a non-residential use other than parking for this project because of the unique
nature of the street of Siegel Street and I'll go back to just the photos of the street you can see
that the a commercial space is not viable along Siegel Street because the entire block was
essentially just garage access and there's no commercial space along Siegel Street at all so
uh it was designed in a way that we had the front-facing um curb cuts are you there we
have the front-facing uh garage for the off-street parking to sort of match with what the current um
the current feel of the street is and it makes something that's more viable it makes more sense
so in in terms of the various criteria we believe that the uh the requests of variance
are de minimis inappropriate for the neighborhood we don't anticipate any additional congestion of
public streets or transportation we don't believe we don't impair the uses of adjacent properties
or life supply or air anything of that nature um and we also don't believe
supply or air, anything of that nature. And we also don't believe there'll be a detrimental
impact to health, safety, or welfare of the neighborhood that would exceed what would
be expected for this type of use. For all these reasons, we believe that the variance is
appropriate and we request that approval. As I stated earlier, I have both Timothy
Perner and Mark Bongiovanni here with me. Were we able to find them? I just want them to
raise their hand. Then Mr. Bertel asked them if they will adopt your testimony. I need them to
identify themselves and I'll square them in. Okay. I'm familiar with that block. It's nothing but
garages. You're right. Tim, if you could raise your hand.
I know that he's on.
My hand is raised.
This is Tim Kerner.
Mr. Kerner, please spell your name for the record.
Identify yourself.
Name and address.
It's Timothy Kerner.
T-I-M-O-T-H-Y
K-E-R-N-E-R
Do you swear and affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
I'm sorry I interrupted you.
You were about to give your address.
I apologize.
my address is 2205 Bainbridge Street did you hear the testimony that I provided to the board
in the chair this morning yes I did do you confirm the truth of my testimony and adopted as their own
yes it was very good testimony I have one minor correction to make though having to do with the
five foot setback uh originally the green roof was an
occupied area and then the rco requested that we
make the green roof unoccupied we set the railing back so
at this point if we were to submit again that particular variance would go away
we know we do have more than a five foot setback at this
point for the occupied area of the deck okay thank you so thank you for that
correction does that conclude mr pretzel yes if i could ask one question if this is approved you
are requesting revised plans two pages is that correct yes and the two pages would be the
elevation and the site plan you've also submitted i think shadow studies but that isn't something
that the board would be required to stamp i think the site plan and elevation show the changes that
you're requesting i believe there's also a request for proviso requiring a laundry closet in each
unit is that correct that's correct thank you that's correct um if uh to the obviously to the
board where we would request that that be included sharon is that enforceable
the laundry closet in each unit um yes i believe that's enforceable it it was originally submitted
as a floor plan i don't think that we can um require them to place it in a certain place but
having um a washer and dryer in each unit is probably okay thank you
garen uh two pages you said yes two pages they'll be stamped yes and
that's it right okay um any any other uh witnesses
i don't have anybody's hand up chair thank you tanya uh questions from the board no
planning commission chairman i would first like to give a little background information on a green
roof bonus in order to receive a green roof bonus the plan has to be reviewed by the water department
for their stormwater division and a deed restriction has to be put in place in order for any bonus to
apply so while it's nice that they're putting that green roof on it doesn't meet the standards of
what the city would require and so now our recommendation is this property is indicated
for residential use on the comprehensive plan the block is primarily for commercial garages and we
have concerns over the compatibility of the proposal with the existing uses on the block
Accordingly, we recommend that the requested variant does not be granted.
So, if we approve it, we can put a condition on this, Sharon, that they get the approvals
regarding the green roof?
I don't think, correct me if I'm wrong, Steve, but you are not requesting a bonus, are you?
No, we're not requesting the bonus. The square footage of the building is too small to, it's under 5,000 square feet, so therefore we wouldn't qualify for that bonus.
No, we are not requesting a bonus.
we did the square footage of the
So what I was presenting to the board is that because we don't qualify for the actual bonus,
we can't go through that process, but we are the green roof that we have in the project is
to the standards. I guess sans what was just described by the Planning Commission in terms
of pre-approvals that we wouldn't go through in terms of the dimensional standards. It's
to the standards of the code in that regard but we we're not actually requesting a bonus we're
just utilizing it thank you as a green roof despite not so uh paula yes that that change
does that change the opinion of the planning commission since they don't need we would actually
add that then it's an overuse because you're saying that you're because you have a green roof
you should have more units when you don't can't even put the deed restriction on it and meet the
spirit of the code it then becomes more of an overuse so it's too many units they wouldn't have
met that so the green roof's just a selling point at this point not a i like to reiterate just in
terms of the square footage requirements um for the units we if i write we would be we would be
approved for four um we were two square feet yes two square feet away from a meeting the standards
to be approved for five um we're requesting six because we believe uh we have what we're including
in the project uh does meet the standard of what would increase by 25 even though we wouldn't go
uh through those approvals would you put a deed restriction on i'm sorry would it have a deed
restriction to include the green roof for 25 30 years and be monitored then it wouldn't meet that
right i understand we're not going through any approvals for the actual bonus from the city
that's correct would you put deed restrictions separately for the green roof that i would have
to i can't i don't have the authority to say one way so at that point we think it's still
an overuse because they would only be allowed just under five and they're proposing six
understood okay any other questions
anyone else testifying
no hands up chair thank you calendar number
calendar number 39608 1108-1112 single street my vote is yes with the following provisors
laundry closet to be installed in each unit two pages revised plan two pages stamped today
Did I leave something out, Sharon?
Yes, with proviso.
No, that was it.
Thank you.
Yes, with proviso.
Thank you.
Calendar number 39127.
1426 North 7th Street.
1426 North 7th Street.
Vince.
Dufino
Vince, unmute yourself
Alrighty, I'm unmuted
Good morning, sir
You agree to waive the reading of his refusal
and stipulate to its accuracy?
of course i do thank you sir name and address for the record please
sure vincent anthony defino it's d-e capital f-i-n-o good morning chairman
de chico members of the board morning mr defino do you swear and
affirm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth
yes i do thank you please proceed okay this is uh 1426 north 7th street
llc that's who i represent uh the principal's mom at u school and we have charles care somewhere
on the line he's the architect uh the original plan was basically for five units
what i'll do is i'll go in and i'll open up my exhibit package and we'll get you some pictures
and there's the lot there so it's an oversized 22.6 uh by so many pictures yet we don't have it
oh i gotta share the screen i'm sorry
Oh, I got to share the screen.
I'm sorry.
You have it now?
So this is the lot here.
And this is the next door neighbors.
There's a five-unit, I believe, and a four-unit prestige pavilions in this neighborhood pretty
deeply.
They have probably six or seven different four-unit, five-unit type buildings.
So basically, we met with the board back in December 2nd, which was APM RCO.
There was a six-member panel.
They're very familiar with the area.
um none of them actually lived in in the real adjacent vicinity but uh they were they had some
major concerns because we proposed five units and it was 42 feet and they had asked us among
several other things would you consider four units and would you consider bringing it down
the height of 38 feet. So my client obliged them with the 38 foot and bringing it down
to four units. They were primarily concerned with the use of the basement because it's
a high flood area. So they wanted storage in the basement. They wanted maybe trash in
the basement ventilated of course uh but we could also put that outside that's not an issue because
we have plenty of footage in the back so we went back to the drawing board they also wanted a
proviso for brick facade in the front because they didn't like the current nature of certain
uh certain buildings in the area they wanted it more colonial to match the the spirit of the
neighborhood which was not a problem and they wanted plenty of storage space in the basement
for bikes and for you know basically for for the tenants so they'd have storage space for their
personal products um so basically we went back to the drawing board and we drew the plans up
And I have the revised plans here, which Charles Kerr can speak to.
But you can see the first page is the condition of the neighborhood.
And then we have here the four units.
Two of them will be bi-level, 771 square foot.
And two of them will be 975 square foot and cover a whole floor.
and that's the elevation there it's 38 feet it's within the code so that refusal goes away
um i wanted to go and what we did is we put the neighbors on notice
um and here's the proof of certificate of mailing that was required by the rco
and there's 130 neighbors that we put on blast about the meeting and everything going on
and none of the immediate neighbors showed up to the actual uh meeting one of the board members
did show up and we had um two other people in the crowd that were not from the neighborhood
and they seemed to be young and then there was one gentleman that was intaking people
but here's the letter from the uh this is a letter of support from one of the neighbors 1418
north 7th street uh he had uh my client build him a house which was basically four doors five doors
over i had united group it says as the general contractors that built my home i must say that
this company is very well organized professional detail-oriented quality of work they put in their
homes are above most contractors that i've looked into using they're giving me a schedule throughout
the entire process and most keep my schedule my home stays very warm in the winter and cool and
summer so he's very happy with their building he's he's down the street and he has no objection
and um i'm going to go now to the neighborhood letter um here's the summary of the meeting
um here's the summary of the meeting now none of the board members one of the board members was
Thank you.
there uh jamie ferron and she was asking you know did we meet all the requirements that
we're supposed to meet with regard to what the board wanted we went over it with her
she was happy uh no questions from anybody but somehow there's a two to one opposition vote
Hey, Vince, could you share that letter?
You don't see the letter.
Oh, it's not being shared?
Not on my end, anyway.
It's a gray screen.
It's in blank.
This letter's not being shared.
Oh, wait.
Do I hit this here?
Here comes my administrative assistant again.
I'm going to get this straight by the third meeting.
all going through the same problems no problem no worries
it paused for some reason okay resume start okay
i have to go down here and uh letter uh rco meeting summary okay
all right let's see here you are screen sharing i'm screen sharing now so that so here's the vote
it was two to one um still don't have the letter you still don't have it no it says i am screen
sharing but uh maybe because all we see is the first picture you posted oh wow i don't know what's
going on that's funny there we go got it now all right all right stay here because i don't know
what i'm doing all right so there's the vote it's two to one none of the board members voted even
know we know for a fact that uh jamie ferrant was there she's one of the board members and she's very
very intelligent person that went through this step by step with us so if you look
to the actual um letter itself uh it talks about what's going on it says um the owner's attorney
and developer presented their proposed development and request for variances they expressed a lot
is presently zoned rsa 5 which prohibits multi-family developer is proposing to erect a
building with four units they explained that the project was initially five units and one big in
the basement but this was eliminated after the first interaction with the board which did not
want the bedrooms in the basement after this meeting they also added trash storage in the
basement reduced the original planned height she goes on and talks about the units and then
And at the very bottom, she says, provisors must be added if the project is approved to assure installation of sink trash compactors and to add additional closet space in the units.
So basically, I have the architect here if you want to go through the plans, but we would ask, we mailed the neighborhood, we had support from the neighborhood.
there was never even a question as to any issues and uh
i'm you're breaking up tom yes can i see the first floor oh yes certainly can i see the first floor
yes and i keep i can bring in the architect i can bring in the architect to go over the
let let's hear what mr holliman has to say we may or may not need the architect
and tom is breaking up so are you seeing this yes you got it now i i can i this is the first floor
here you see see the first floor
i think he broke i'm not seeing no i still i i can see it okay
the first floor how do you get the trash out
what was that i'm sorry you were breaking up how do you get the trash out on the first floor
I could bring in the architect, Charles Kerr, he could explain everything to you.
Charles Carr he could explain everything to you Charles are you out there the car
you have to raise your hand I know there's a side I think there's a side
yard there but I don't want to go into it without he knows exactly but there's
two there's two different they wanted to trash storage ventilated in the basement but i think
it might be a better idea because we have the outside space to the back that it'd be brought
there and i think you could get there through the through the first two units through the side there's
a side yard that goes that way but it would be very helpful to get mr uh care on and i'll try
to text him right now to see oh okay so he lost sound at 10 27. he raised his hand so
he should be there yeah how about now can you hear me now there you go yes so please identify
yourself for the record state state your name and address and spell your name for the stenographer
uh my name is charles kerr c-h-a-r-l-e-s kerr k-e-r-r i'm with cadre design and my address
is one two three leverington avenue in philadelphia thank you mr kerr do you swear and affirm to tell
the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth i do thank you please please proceed mr
dofino okay um mr karr uh they wanted to know exactly how we would get the trash out of the
first two units so the so the the first floor is the is the common entry into the building that's
the uh vince if you're sharing your screen could you show the the through corridor on the first
floor so there's a yeah that's that's it right there so that's the common the entire building
uh and then there's apartment doors off of that common corridor so that will be the common access
into the building and come out and then the trash will be brought out through
through the front door essentially so this is the rear yard here and it would be brought right here
in this area here if if we were to use the rear yard it would it would be brought through this
corridor here and then out to the back correct during the rco we were given the option to either
locate the trash in the rear yard or in the basement that was one of the reasons we eliminated
all the living spaces out of the basement but that would be the best option to go with
will all the units have access to that
uh yes because of the this is a four-story building proposing four units so we are required
to have two means of egress so those two stair towers that you're looking at in the middle of
the plan uh are accessed for the entire building so that common corridor is for all the residents
of the building thank you because i think i heard a couple times trash the access for the two
apartments would be through to the rear but you're saying all four could have access to that
that is correct thank you tom yes that's good let me ask you another question
what's the makeup of the block multi-family or single family the majority of the block
uh i can go to that for you i can go to that for you um i have properties and i think
so the the block is obviously a mixture of both of single family and quite a few multi-family
what's the majority i would say it's very close to probably 60 60 40 50 50 residential versus
commercial if you add the units in the in the commercial you have probably six or seven four
to five bedrooms within a block either way and within two blocks you probably have about 15 uh
multi so and and and here are a few of them i got them you can see them it it's a lot of this
prestige the gray buildings you're seeing are you seeing them yes okay these gray buildings here
are all on the block there's one of them has like probably 20 units in it the other one has
uh five or six units the two adjacent buildings if you're facing our building i can show you
the two adjacent buildings if you're facing our building i can show you the two adjacent buildings
um right here are multi-family our lot is right next door to those you can see the utilities on
the brick building right here there's probably five units in there and there's our lot which
is right next door to that so okay the nature the nature is high high highly uh multi-units
okay thank you you're welcome uh and yeah all right um mr dofino do you have your client on as well
i don't think he's here right now if he's not if he's there i'll ask if he
adopts your testimony if not we'll move on i have two two clients actually but my met are you out
there anyone who needs to testify will have to raise their hand yeah i don't think he's out there
okay all right any uh questions from the board no no planning commission
this property is indicated for residential use on the comprehensive plan we feel that this
application represents an overuse in both unit count or in unit count of a single family district
that has been remapped recently accordingly we recommend the requested variance does not be granted
given the fact that there's looks a ton of multi-family on that block
well we did a community remapping and one of the goals was to make this single family so we
try to support the work we do yeah and i get that and i'm not uh you know being disrespectful i just
think it might be a little bit too late for that but okay all right calendar no no revised plans
correct the the plans were reduced the original plans were reduced so they may be
i don't know if we need revisions charles you there uh yeah actually the the floor plans we
were just looking at are the revised plan and if you scroll through a little bit more uh the
revised floor plans the revised elevation to to have brick on the elevation as the rco asked
uh and as well that indicates the reduced height that is currently the revised elevation
uh the rco requested a uh a larger masonry brace and then the upper floor to be
so they permitted some metal paneling and mostly the red brick veneer that you would typically
find in uh philadelphia okay so there's one is it one page no they i don't think that you submitted
did you submit a revised plans proviso form yes i i did with my uh it's in my exhibit
it's right here the proviso plans form was changed at the request of the meeting the
project was changed five units to four the building height was changed to 40 foot plus
to 38 generally don't like to stamp floor plans I'm wondering if we could rather than
stamping the plans just add two provisos one saying maximum four units the other saying
maximum height 38 feet would that change there is a revised zoning sheet in here also that indicates
all of the revised uh updates so if you scroll down a little bit further uh vince yeah it didn't
scroll any further than that that's it that's all i got here okay well it wouldn't matter because if
it wasn't listed as one of the changes in the revised proviso plan it would not be approved in
any case so if there are revisions in addition to those that are listed um i'm afraid you're going to
have to come back and at least present that no that's it i think that's it i think we're good
there okay so then you can do the two provisos and that would cover everything yes it would
okay okay thank you sherry thank you all right calendar number 39127 1426 north 7th street
my vote is yes with the following provisos maximum number of units to be four
maximum height 38 feet yes with provisos yes with provisos
thank you all thank you very much thank you everyone have a great day guys
Thank you.
Girls, everybody.
Calendar number 3988730 Pelham Road.
Steve Masters.
Did I hear you earlier?
did i hear you uh earlier someone maybe it was sharon said that this case is being continued
no no i think friendship street no not this one back on the record
steve unmute yourself ah great okay
do you agree to wave the reading of his refusal and stipulate to its accuracy
um i do
name and i just for the record steve masters law firm of just laws 621 west mount area avenue in
philadelphia here on behalf of the applicant occasion mr masters excuse me you're swearing
to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth i do and i don't know if you heard me
earlier i asked that you uh your testimony uh do your best to uh put in uh whatever you need on
the record that it's most important. We're trying to keep these hearings to a minimum of one hour.
Thank you. Good morning, Mr. Chairman and members of the board. I'm going to give you a brief
introduction to this project, and then we're going to have a few witnesses who are going to go into
more details for you around the different aspects of it. We hear about the historic Fairlawn Manor
F-A-I-R-E-L-A-W-N. It sits at the corner of Pelham and Cresham Roads in West Mount Airy on a 1.2
acre lot. The property is currently zoned RSD2 single-family residential. It's a historic
mansion that was constructed between 1897 and 1902. Same architects that built that mansion
built the iconic Bellevue Stratford Hotel on Broad Street. It took 60 artisans four years
to complete the construction of the Fairlawn Manor, and today the house has 10 plus bedrooms
and four and a half bathrooms in a massive 10,000 square foot structure. The mansion has been vacant
for over five years, and it has seriously deteriorated to the point where it's now in
jeopardy of demolition. Our client Philly Office Retail purchased this property to preserve and
save the mansion. As you would imagine, that cost is substantial and we'll get into some of the
details with our witness Ken Weinstein. Our design calls for converting the mansion into two very
large condominiums. One will be five bedroom and four and a half bath units and the other will be
four bedrooms and four and a half baths in order to finance the staggering costs for rehabilitating
this extremely large home the plan calls for subdividing the 1.2 acre site into five parcels
four of those parcels will be sold off to Chris Murray and Jonathan Thomas and Jonathan Thomas
will be one of the witnesses testifying today they plan to build four single family homes
in the form of two twins that will be facing pelham road immediately next to a row of existing
five row homes just the same the same character in terms of landscaping there will be some trees
that are going to be removed obviously in construction but we're going to be putting
in a lot more new trees and shrubs and professionally landscaping the whole lot after construction
for traffic and parking we're actually going to result in an increase in parking spaces
we are going to uh have the residents of the four uh new homes use the driveway off of cresham uh
i'm sorry off of um pelham road that would take away three on-street parking spaces but we're
creating uh two parking spaces for each of the homes so we're going to have a net gain of five
excuse me steve were you able to share that we don't have a screen oh sure sure sure and can i
interrupt for one minute um i apologize this there was no decision on this being continued but there
was a continuance request submitted um charles richardson is um charles richardson would like
to speak on that he's from councilman bass's office he's here richardson good morning mr
chair and uh committee uh councilwoman is asking for a continuance on this case uh she believes
there is a higher degree of opposition that's reflected in the results of the RCO meeting.
It was a very lengthy meeting of two-plus hours, and at least 15 people that I saw and approached as they were leaving cited the fact that it was the length of the meeting that caused them to leave.
It was a very lengthy meeting of two plus hours and at least 15 people that I saw.
The RCO committee also allowed the developer himself to vote as a near neighbor on his own project, and the prospective co-developer of the proposed four houses to vote as well.
Neither of them is a near neighbor or lives close by.
She also has a question on the vote total, which we got two different reports that it was 20 to 17 and the margin was in opposition as opposed to being as for being in favor.
So she's requesting a continuance and for them to hold another meeting in order to actually get a full idea of what the people actually wanted to occur at that location.
and can i say that there was some confusion because the original letter from the rco that
you received was one of non-opposition then they discovered that the vote had been flipped that um
and actually the majority were in opposition so we received another letter yesterday
um mr chair and after that there there has been i'm going to agree that there has been some
confusion as to uh the vote but it has been resolved and um not to our who wrote the letter
not to our excellent time please mr masters continue thank you so m so ralph pinkus wrote
the letter um that we have um in front of us now which was um dated july 24th mr pinkus
was not present at the RCO meeting that happened in early March. We have, we would like to present
the testimony right now of Bob Bembry, who is an attorney and who was the chair of that meeting
and who, but he's a member of the zoning committee of Westman Airy Neighbors. Mr. Pincus was assigned
the task of writing the letter but Mr. Bembry was the one who took the tally and took the vote
so i would like to have Mr. Bembry join us and offer testimony at this point
okay but there's a request for continuance so Mr. Richardson
I'm going to suggest that we go forward with the meeting with this hearing the board will hold off
on any decision uh and mr masters maybe you can then uh accommodate the councilwoman's request
uh to have another meeting
uh well that is that is certainly possible mr chair but what we have here is um if the only
issue is what was the correct vote of this meeting we can we can resolve that with you today because
we have the chair of the meeting who is on standby to come and testify as to that the vote was
correct it was 20 in favor and 17 opposed and you'll hear um excuse me excuse me steve uh let
me speak on on that uh with the near neighbors the eight to eight vote if uh the developer was
allowed to vote which normally in most rco meetings they are asked to leave the bill they
leave the room at least during the vote but he was allowed to stay and to vote for his own project
also the code of the prospective co-developer also voted for part of that of that 20 to 17
and you know and again it's that that's an anomaly that's not something that's normally
done and and in fact they're voting for their own interest so we want a continuance we do want a
continuance. Mr. Bembry is currently in the Zoom chat, and I would really like him to just
clarify what really happened, because I feel that the councilwoman's representative, who wasn't
there, he was there at the beginning of the meeting, through the middle, and he left before
the vote was taken, so he has no personal knowledge of the vote. Mr. Bembry has no personal knowledge
of the vote. I do have a, I got a text as I was leaving. And as I had indicated, my wife had just
had gotten out of the hospital from surgery. I had left her at home to come to this, to this
meeting. I stayed until about nine o'clock. And I asked the executive director of Westbound Area
Neighbors, Catherine McKenzie Ziegler, to text me what the results actually were.
so let me interrupt let me interrupt is the is the mr richardson i guess it's more
is the is the mr richardson i guess it's more for you than than mr masters is the issue at hand
for you than than mr masters
the count the vote count not not all of the vote count because again 15 people left that were in
opposition that i spoke to well and then the councilwoman has received several calls over
the last uh couple of days asking for her to oppose and we're not opposing what we're doing
is asking for another meeting here's my point if people left that meeting uh i i don't know why
the applicant should be held um we should be holding it up i'm not suggesting we would vote
today i would give it at least another week i don't know if we need another meeting if the issue
is the count now the issue is someone like we can like i think mr masters said we can have the uh
the zoning chair for West Mount Airy will get that testimony on the record,
but to hold it for another hearing, another meeting rather, just because of the vote count,
I guess. She has received, Mr. Chair, she's received several calls with regard to opposition
to the project, and as I indicated, had it not gone for two plus hours, that we probably would
have had a different type of outcome. But again, I am not really concerned about the outcome,
and neither is the councilwoman. The issue is, was the level of opposition is higher than is
reflected in the RCO meeting. And she's very concerned about the fact that people's voices
were not heard. Mr. Chair, what we're going to have today, and members of the board, we have
five near neighbors who literally border on this giant 1.2 acre property they're all strongly in
support of it um we have uh the westmanry neighbor zoning committee itself voted unanimously
in favor of of this project uh the the community did have some people in support some people in
opposition but the ones in support were more um so that that's the whole picture but um i agree
with you um mr chair that this isn't a reason for a continuance and we can certainly clarify what
the vote was by putting mr vembrey uh for some brief testimony right now and mr chair can i
suggest that there's one possibility would be um scheduling a second brief limited hearing where
any member of the public who believes that they did not have an opportunity to um register their
opposition will be given an opportunity to speak and then the case will be voted i mean those same
people who attended the meeting and maybe left early or left after the two and a half hours
if those are some of the people that are calling your office mr richardson as sharon suggested we
could hear from them if they choose to you know get on get on they a brief hearing well that that
that could could be a possibility but again i do have issues with the fact that uh the developer
himself was allowed to vote as one of the near neighbors and it was tied 8-8 well well he will
not be voting if we if we hear from the those other folks who have been calling your office
that'll give us a better indication of what the count should have been okay or could have been
we can do that all right so why don't we proceed yes and and then we'll hold sure
thank you and there were sorry at sharon's suggestion we can do a brief hearing we'll
figure out the timing on that once you conclude with your testimony okay um and there were many
supporters of the projects who also left early because it was a long meeting and so it was not
just a one-sided thing understood um so maybe what would be i i do want to touch briefly on
the hardship issues and then i'm going to go to my witnesses who will walk through the plans with
you the site plans show you why we don't um well we don't have any more problems with the two
um variances related to the watershed and uh the steep slope uh why the dimensional variances are
are very important and why the use variants for the two um the two condos in the manor are essential
but in terms of unnecessary hardship uh this mansion is functionally obsolete and can no
longer be used in conformance with a single family use so under the holdings of marshall
and logan square neighborhood uh that constitutes unnecessary hardship under the code
the proposed two-family dwelling use is the minimum variance that will provide
relief and for the dimensional variances you'll see why these are just very
slight variances from the setbacks so that we can have
uh variances from the setbacks so that we can have four homes with the proper size to conform
to the characteristics of the adjacent five row homes. I'm gonna call Ken Weinstein as my first
witness. Ken I think you're supposed to raise your hand to get recognized by the board administrator.
i'm sorry steve i didn't catch that last part oh i'm i'd like uh ken weinstein to uh to be my
first witness and i think he has to rip his hand all right mr weinstein i'm here thank you please
identify yourself for the record state your name and address i'm ken weinstein uh president of
philly office retail i live at 502 west allens lane in philadelphia do you swear in a firm to
tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? I do. Thank you, Mr. Weinstein. Please
proceed. Ken, before we start with your testimony, you have heard my testimony so far today. Do you
adopt it as true and correct and as your own testimony? It is true and correct. Thank you.
all right great so um let's uh what kind of what exhibits would you like me to show while we're
talking about uh the the plans that you have for the mansion and how you developed uh this this
design by either the floor plans or the elevations of the mansion would be great okay so let's do
okay thank you um so not to repeat what steve already presented um i just wanted to say uh
we're looking forward to restoring this 10 000 square foot mansion uh the game plan
is to make it into two condos, a four, excuse me, a five bedroom, four and a half bath condo
and a four bedroom, four and a half bath condo. So two very sizable units. We've been working
closely with the Philadelphia Historic Commission to plan the restoration and work within their
guidelines. Improvements will include all new systems, HVAC, electric, plumbing, security roof
and other, and careful restoration of the interior and exterior.
As Steve mentioned, the mansion is historically designated, so we understand it's closely
regulated, and we have done many historic renovations over the years and, in fact, have
won six historic preservation awards from the Preservation Alliance.
So we look forward to this kind of work.
The mansion is currently badly deteriorated
Wind and rain
Which are entering the house
Through openings in the roof
And windows have taken a real bad toll
On the house
And it's now in serious jeopardy of demo
If we don't start renovation soon
We estimate the improvements
To the house to be in the
One to one and a half million dollar range
Does not make sense
Financially for us
So to help pay for those expensive historic improvements to restore the house to its former glory, we plan to subdivide the rear of the house into four additional lots that, as Steve said, we will be selling off to Chris Murray, who is a near neighbor, and her partner and builder, John Thomas, who are here.
Let me stop you there. When you say, I think you might have misspoke when you said we're going to divide the back of the house into four lots. You mean the back of the property, right? Not the house itself.
Yes, excuse me if I misspoke. The rear lot, which is sort of a plateau that faces Pelham Road while the mansion faces Cresham Road.
And yes, here's a site plan to give you a better idea.
You can see that the mansion faces Cresham Road and the driveway to the mansion is off of Cresham Road.
and we're taking this rear plateau area that faces Pelham Road that sits about half a block from
the commercial corridor on Germantown Avenue. And the proposed four new development houses,
which are a set of two sets of twins, sit adjacent to five row houses. So
to five row houses. So from Germantown Avenue, there's five stone row houses that would be
followed by our four twins before getting to the corner of Cresham and Pelham. So we tried to
design something that we felt would fit in to the density and the nature of the neighborhood.
in terms of the mansion unlike previous developments who wanted to carve up the
mansion into six apartments we decided that dividing the house into two units was a much
better way to go in order to cause as little damage as possible to the interior of the property
we're not proposing any additions to the house nor are we making any changes to window or door
openings. So from a community perspective, other than seeing the fully restored house
and finally landscape property, there's not going to be any noticeable changes to the house. So
there won't be any difference from what it looks like now from the street when we divided into two
condo units. The Bedouf family with their 23 adopted children were the last occupants of the
mansion. They left five and a half years ago, January of 2015, and tried to sell it through
a realtor for around two years before it was eventually sold twice through an auction.com
site. The developer who purchased it the first time couldn't make the project work financially,
and then, of course, we purchased it the second time, and there was only one other bidder
when we eventually purchased it. At 10,000 square feet, there's very little demand for a property
of this size. And as a real estate professional for more than 30 years in the Mount Airy area,
I keep a close eye on residential housing market in Northwest Philly. There's clearly a movement
away from owning and occupying mansions. People just don't want the astronomical utility bills
associated with owning a house of this size.
So that's all I have for now,
and I'm happy to answer any questions.
Weinstein, you said you guys, you bought it.
Has that been settled,
or is it contingent on the zoning variance?
Mr. Chairman, we have purchased it.
Okay, thank you.
Tom you're breaking up
Can you hear me now
It's a little better
Am I better now
How many refusals is on the
Historical property
How many refusals did you get
For the historical property
ah here you go so we have 20 uh 27 uh so we have one use refusal which is that two family household
living is prohibited in in the mansion because it's a single family zoning um it's rsd3 uh we
have we're dividing into five lots um so we have some dimensional variances um we have in terms of
maximum area for accessory structures because of the the garages that we're putting in the back
of each of those lots we have some dimensional refusals for all five lots and then for the for
the new uh the new lots that are going to be subdivided lots for the new four single family
homes we have uh dimensional variances for each one around the minimum um width the minimum lot
area as you can see the the setbacks for rear and front then we have two very two refusals that
we're going to address with our site engineer Rondo Mobley and momentarily in her testimony
we've addressed both of those so they no longer exist but they but at the time that we applied
there was one refusal for section 14-510-8 around soil erosion and
impervious cover and then one for steep slope protection which you seem like to
me you have a lot of a lot of refusals you can't design that with less
refusals? We did. We now, we have revised plans that definitely have less refusals. So can I put
my, let's put my architect on so maybe she can address that with you better. Rondo, could you
Rhonda could you could you raise your hand for the for the panel these are
could you raise your hand for the panel?
revised plans yes these two that we have in in the in the revised exhibit binder
are revised plans and and we and they're notated with they're annotated with and
and circled with the areas that are changed so I wanted to have Rhonda go
through that with you let me ask you were the revised plans uh uh were showing to uh
to the community at the rco uh meeting
at the time no we met with the planning commission um after i believe after the rco meeting and and
as a result of our um several meetings with the planning commission we revised the plans after that
So to confessor's question, the RCO has not seen the revised plans.
The revised plans are not, they don't address, they address the steep slope and the impervious cover issues that the Planning Commission raised.
But it addresses some of the refusals, correct?
They address the last two refusals around watershed and steep slope.
the refusals where the planning commission wouldn't uh wouldn't put their stamp on the
on the plans those are the the two that these that these address so frank um paula from planning
commission is raising her hand would you wish her to speak at this time yes yes before that though
we just want the director to reflect that james snell our other board member is in attendance
as well thank you paula chairman and members of the board i'm looking in because we're working
remotely i can't run down to the office to pull any old plans but i am looking at our database
from before march 18th and i am not finding a signature on any indication that we reviewed a
plan after january 10th 2020 and we still disapproved slope and watershed so i don't have a copy of a
revised plan that we've signed off on that doesn't mean it doesn't exist but we don't have it
in hand understood could you help us with that mr masters yes i'd like to have my my site engineer
come on and testify about that oh excuse me and are you revising your plan for at the hearing did
you submit in the plan revision because this is not what you applied with we did we we've submitted
the revised plan form and the revised plans um appropriately to the to the zoning board
uh rondo are you out there i yes okay rondo mobley please spell your name for the record
identify yourself please yes mr chairman rondo mobley first name is r o n d o last name m o b
as in boy l e y and do you swear and affirm to tell the
truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth
yes thank you please proceed um rhonda maybe we should go first
through the expert report from from you and your colleagues at
um ruggiero plant um i believe that is uh exhibit
so walk us through this report please i'm sorry steve oh just walk us through
this okay so one of the refusals that i addressed
at the beginning is the Wissahickon Watershed Overlay. That was a refusal based on incorrect
information shown on the submitted plan. We initially showed the watershed impervious cover
as category three, which was at the direction of PWD. I, since then, have revised those plans
to show that it's Category 5. And this was a correction after meeting with Paula and Sarah
that confirmed that it is, in fact, Category 5 and not Category 3, and therefore, we have no
percentage limitation of impervious coverage. So I believe with this correction that we're showing
on the plan that would eliminate the refusal which is 14704 i'm sorry 14 5 10 8 and planning
and planning commission would have signed off on this um we also
commission would have signed off on this
uh have a approval from uh for erosion and sediment control plan from the water department
is that correct yes excuse me excuse me mr chairman i'm concerned that we're spending time
going through plans that has been revised that the uh community group haven't seen well that was my
that's that was your question obviously my question is there aside from the watershed
and the pervious soils issues were there any other revisions made to the project there were not mr
chairman the only revisions are those directly related to the impervious cover and steep slopes
Mr. Chairman, I go back to why there's so many refusals, and it's all new design, except for the historical building.
Yes, I have another witness, Mr. Holloman, to address the dimensional variances for the four new homes.
But I just wanted to finish with the site engineer to have her testify as to the second, how she addressed the second refusal for the open space and natural resources, if we could.
And then I'm happy to put on Mr. Thomas to describe to you why the dimensional variances are necessary for the four new homes.
Well, I think that goes to Tom's question.
I could be wrong.
You're asking us, we're hearing the case.
are asking us to possibly vote on this without but the rco is not aware of some of these changes
is that accurate um no mr chair the the only changes that we're talking about are the ones
that address the planning commission's um refusals around the impervious pavement and the steep slope
and the whole what the community was focused on was the use of the mansion and the construction
of four new homes so there's been no change to the design and the placement of the any of the
dimensions of the new homes or the placement of them at all it's just it's just how we are
addressing the soil erosion the impervious of space and the steep slope aspects mr chairman
my concern is where's the hardship for so many uh refusals for the five lots
well we haven't put on that testimony yet i i can do that i just wanted to make sure that my
my site engineer testimony all right well let's finish finish with uh this portion of the testimony
sure so ronda could you could you then we'll get the time after thank you sorry could you go into
the next section on the open space and natural resources and explain how we address the planning
commission's issue sure sure so for uh natural resources 147042 um it's our belief that with
a minor disturbance of the steep slopes to parcels A and B, that we do not adversely
impact the community as well as any degradation of the environment. Our thoughts are is that
because the maximum height is five feet and it's a limited contributing area,
drainage, not much drainage exists currently. What we're proposing is to go
in and remove the steep slopes to 12 percent, which would obviously not cause
any hazards of soil erosion, any accelerated storm runoff, and furthermore just reduce
the runoff from the steep slopes that currently exist. In addition to the percent slope being
reduced to 12 percent we would also we want to point out that we do have our soil erosion program
that has the ns plan that has already been approved we will follow the best management
practices and also we will include a steep slope work plan which i have outlined below
And with this work plan, we'll just go take into account all the various from.
take into account all the various, from soil types to inclemental weather, the issues we
would deal with, we would take that all into account and we will already have our soil
soil erosion controls in place to ensure that we do not provide any erosion to the existing
area. And I want to point out it is a small area that we are disturbing and that area
is just for the footprint of the two homes and to also if you look below and to also install the
utilities so let's look at the map rondo and you can show us what we're talking about
so parcel a and b which i have clouded is the area of steep slope disturbance that
that we are going to disturb for the footprint of the building as well as the proposed utilities.
And that area, as I just stated, is a very small area and it does not have much drainage
area that we have to contend with anyway.
So by reducing the steep slopes, we further reduce the contributing drainage area, and we have very little water runoff directed over those slopes.
So when our original plan, is it correct to say that our original plan, we had a steep slope that was more than 25% in that area?
So the steep slopes as marked on our plans are 25% and more, depending on the area.
And now, under these revised plans, we are reducing those steep slopes to...
To 12%.
Okay. And did you change the design of the steps on the walkway?
What I did was showed completely the sidewalk and the steps that weren't previously shown.
Before, the plan did not include the sidewalk and the steps to the sidewalk.
So the walkway wasn't shown and the steps entering or exiting to the sidewalk.
we always show the footprint of the building and the steps leading into the uh the residence okay
was that change made made known to the rco at the time of the hearing
it was not because it was not shown on the plan okay no i'm trying to get to tom
mr holliman's concerns here sure that wasn't shown it was just basically a
layer not turned on that was not presented on the plan however we did
show to indicate that from the front door steps you would of course enter to
a sidewalk I mean a walkway with steps to the sidewalk so the disturbance area
hasn't changed because the footprint of the building remains in the same location and the
existing utilities. Thank you. Okay, so Rhonda, for the first impervious
covering refusal, is that indicated somewhere on this map that there's been a change in the
category? It is. If you go to the very, go up to the top of the plan, just go down at the very top
of the plans you'll see the section with the category right there and that's been clouded so
before the plan showed that as category three and now it's been revised to category five
okay all right um thank you so uh do do we have any more questions for this witness uh around the
the two planning commission uh refusals any members of the board have any questions no
all right um then ronda you are excused and i would like um uh john thompson uh to
to uh raise your hand i'm sorry jonathan thomas
to uh raise your hand i'm sorry jonathan thomas sorry about that
ah you are here okay great um so we're gonna look at we need to get mr thompson oh sorry you have
to get him thomas on the record name minutes please state your name and address spell your
name for the court reporter, please. Thomas, J-O-N-A-T-H-A-N-T-H-O-M-A-S, 321 Chapman
Drive, Percasee, PA, 18944. Mr. Thomas, can you explain your role in this project?
we were brought on to the development team as home builder and partner of the um to do the four
uh the twins of the four units um and designing those in a way that those are sellable
and the correct kind of housing configuration to not only have a successful project to be
conscious of the neighborhood, but also to sell them at a maximum value to help take the proceeds
from what we do to help benefit the restoration of the Farlaw Mansion, which I think is the most
important aspect here. And what is, can you just explain the connection between the sale of these
four homes and the ability to preserve and renovate the mansion? My understanding is the
proceeds from the sale of the four lots to us as home builders is they're going to then roll
those proceeds into the restoration of the um you're getting a little cut off unfortunately
could you repeat that the four lots um those go and benefit for the restoration of the uh
the two units in the mansion okay so let's go through the the designs for the
new construction can you see the the screen that I'm sharing Mr. Thomas can
you can you see the the diagram on the screen okay all right so what would you
like me to show to to help you explain um how you design these homes and and why you um you you have
the setbacks the way you do so like the first floor plan um i mean the idea is that we we need
to have a home that's big enough for a growing family in mount area mount area you're going to
have the need for three to four bedrooms um and then we also have a width issue which a lot of
the setbacks um a lot of the variances are from those setbacks and we built a home here that we
feel is very it's wide enough at 18 and a half feet wide outer outer to outer um and then it's
about 50 feet deep on the deepest part um 52 feet deep here that you can see the mudroom um so we
felt that anything smaller than that we would just have a we'd have a subpar you know home to build
and that you know this is kind of like the maximum between what we can do what
we can sell it for and then also like how those proceeds go to benefit the
historic you know renovation of the mansion okay I think I think mr. Holloman
is also asking um as to your choices around um the side and the and the rear um setbacks and the
front setbacks this is as far as can you clarify what the question is let me let me let me ask the
question please okay it seemed like to me that the design of a building is dictating the
zoning parameters whereas zoning parameter should dictate the design of
the building you follow me I do I don't know if I understand a question there
well what can you do to to what can you do design wise to meet the zoning
requirements in my personal opinion as a is a
in my personal opinion as a is a you know i guess a real estate professional for 13 years
i don't feel that we're able to design a smaller home that's that's anything skinnier is going to
be too too narrow um and then with the rear patio that you can kind of see on this image here
is that you have livable space so you have from your back door mudroom area you know where everyone
takes off their dirty clothes and shoes and everything, you step out onto a really nice
patio. And that patio, you have a little bit of rear yard and grass, so it feels like a good
community feel. And then from there, we already put the detached garages in the back. And I think
some of the setbacks are caused by that. However, I know that the support from the person who lives
in the manor house right there is understanding and I believe supports the project. Ken, you can
correct me or stevie can correct me on that um but that i think that is the most extreme
setback variance for there for the accessory structure um
well let me ask let me ask you let me let me ask you if you reduce the number of lots
could you reduce the number of refusals
i i would think that the the factual answer to that would be if you reduce the number
of lots the answer would be yes but then you would be in jeopardy of not being able to preserve
the far lawn mansion because now you're only having two lots and we're not selling
one home for you know twice is what two homes would sell for so you're losing
that that development aspect of it
well should the zoning board be helping you with economic issues
well i i would say i think that's maybe a question more for me than for my witness
um mr holliman um in this case uh the city the city has a very strong public policy
um for preserving um our historic heritage and historic structures and this structure as i said
at the very beginning of the hearing you know is designed by the same architect that designed the
Bellevue Stratford Hotel it's a beautiful example and and worthy of
preservation but it costs a lot of money to do that and it has a 1.2 acre a lot
but as we if we want to look at the whole site plan what we're doing is
we're not taking we're not putting houses you know the the manor itself is
it takes up a quite a bit of space it's 10,000 square feet and that has the
entire look at it basically comes out you know onto on the whole frontage of
Cresham Road and it curves around to it's the corner with Pelham and Cresham
so to take this giant lot we certainly wouldn't want to put houses in a way
that would destroy the grandeur
and the beauty of that mansion
and try to divide up the properties that way
to carve out like a corner lot on Pelham and Cresham,
that would not be pleasing to the neighbors
or to the preservation of this project.
So the only possibility for carving out some subdivisions
and putting some homes was along this portion of Pelham,
which is going towards, it's going to the east
towards Germantown Avenue.
And right next to these four proposed new homes,
these four new townhomes are five row homes,
which we can see in our site photos here.
and make this a little bigger so we so this is you know the mansion we obviously can't put any
homes uh in in the vicinity of the mansion um we're putting the homes um here which um and
then putting the garages back here right next to these five um adjoining row homes so from a from
from a design point of view, this seems to be completely compatible and in character
with the surrounding homes. And perhaps you're right. Perhaps if there was larger lots and
less of them, then there would be less dimensional variances. But the courts have said that when
we're talking about dimensional variances, the issue of financial hardship is appropriate,
is appropriate where it isn't with the use um and with the use with the manor the only use
where it isn't with the use.
And with the use,
variance we have um you'll recall is with is with putting two single family homes in the manor
because it's zoned it's a 10 000 foot 10 bedroom house that's zoned for one family
um and we're putting two homes there that's a use variance and we believe we have
the unnecessary hardship because um because the testimony is we can't use the home with that with
that structure, especially historically protected, we can't do anything with it to make it a single
family home that would be viable. Everything else, dimensionally, we're saying that we need
those four homes in order to generate enough total return so that we can preserve and maintain that
mansion and that's that's just the that's just the economics of of preserving historic buildings
other other developers might come in and want to demolish it and that's not what we're doing
we're actually preserving this poor character for the neighborhood let me let me ask you
counselor did your client apply for historical tax credits uh this is ken weinstein come back for
that. Yeah, thank you. This is Ken Weinstein again. We did not. We don't think this is a large enough
project. Usually when we apply for historic tax credits, we usually do it on $2 million plus
projects. So we did not apply in this case. I'd also like to, if I could, just add on to what
Steve just said and that a lot of the refusals are because of the top topography of the site it's hard
to tell from these pictures but the rear yard where we are proposing to add the four houses
sit up high like a plateau several feet up and we did not want to cut more into the slope
except along Pelham where this where the sidewalk needs to go we didn't want to
cut more into the slope and and damage the slope so we allowed a sizable area
behind the house before the four houses start in order to keep it on the top of
the plateau and that created some less comfortable less straight lines as you
can see in the drawings. So Ken can you can you explain why you chose to do it
that way as opposed to have larger lots and and less houses? Yeah I think John
Thomas already answered that question but we need a certain amount of revenue
out of the rear development in order to make the front building work as you
said Steve it's a sizable investment to restore that house from scratch and stay
within historic historically designated regulations and in order to follow those
regulations to a T we're anticipating that it'll be a large price tag and then
also the the driveway that's that a new driveway to allow all the the home the
new homeowners to have access to these um garages that that takes away some of the dimensional
setbacks that you that you could have had um if you didn't have that correct that is correct
so if you didn't have ability to park on site um then you could have had larger lots but then you
would have had more of a parking impact on the neighbors that's correct what we clearly heard
at the RCO meeting was that parking is a major concern.
So we did not want to negotiate on that
or downsize on that is the right word.
And wanted to insist that each of these new houses
has two parking spots and a garage off street.
So it would not impact the neighbor's ability to park.
Can you also talk about any plans that you may have considered but rejected for putting higher density residential use in the manor?
Well, as I mentioned earlier, we did not want to go the route that other developers had suggested, upwards of six apartments in there.
Because it's a three-story building, it would have laid out to six apartments.
but then the wonderful staircase inside would have had to be a common
staircase inside would have had to be a common staircase. And I think that would have been a
staircase. And I think that would have.
disservice to the building. We also did not want to take the route now allowed in historically
designated houses with previous commercial usage as this house has had and put in something higher
density and not as pleasing to the neighbors like a B&B, restaurant, offices, single room occupancy,
group homes, etc. We do not want to take that route and don't feel that would be fair to the
neighbors. Under the historic designated exception to the use table in the zoning code, would you
be permitted as of right to put in certain uses that you feel would be incompatible and you would
prefer not to do yes the uses i just mentioned can be done by right um and and but we do not
want to go that route and if you did those uses by right would you have the economic would you
be able to get the economic return to to basically you know maintain your ownership of of this
property without having to build the extra houses? Yes. In particular, group homes pay a lot to
developers. It doesn't mean that they should do them in the middle of a residential area,
but that would be another way to go economically. And again, we rejected that idea
in preference to do it this way. And clearly, a majority of the neighborhood agrees with us.
so um members of the board we have um some very brief testimony from the immediate neighbors
all around this property that i would really like to put into the record at this time
mr uh steve unfortunately we have about two minutes that's what my clock says i don't think
you're gonna have enough time uh frank mr chair i think you know you said uh we're gonna have to
continue, right? I don't think we're going to
have enough time.
Frank, you're muted.
I thought we had started
more like at 11, so I thought we had
15 minutes left.
Frank, we're not getting audio from you.
Looks like the chair is having some sound issues.
Steve, you want to continue to hear?
Sure. So we have a petition in support in our exhibit binder from 34 neighbors,
including um from a woman who was the last uh with her family was the last resident of the uh
of the home uh excuse me i'm i'm sorry to interrupt but i have the chairman on my cell phone he for
some reason can't unmute but he's going to um he has a question now go ahead frank
Hi, they're suggesting IT is suggesting Frank you close out and try to rejoin and maybe they that might work
Steve, you want to continue to?
Sure, sure.
Thank you.
Do we have, I have on the list here, we have Chelsea Badeau, Joe Sullivan,
Jen and John Conley, and Megan, John McGann, or Karen Colquitt Hall,
John McGann or Karen Colquitt Hall and Paris Hall,
and Paris Hall, are any of you?
or any of you.
And all those people, Steve, you got to get on the record.
Yes, but very briefly.
We have letters from them, but I just wanted,
they've come to this hearing and I want them to just to,
I think that they could just affirm the letters
that they put into the.
Can you hear me now?
Yes, we can.
Thank you.
Good idea.
Good suggestion.
Thank you.
uh mr chair did you say that was a good suggestion that they could just
reaffirm their letters yes oh no testimony just their name address and whatever okay great
what's the first person uh do we have joseph sullivan on the on the um at the zoom
if i could ask if you could raise your hand if you have to testify
okay let's go down to jenna and john conley
hello hello this is joseph sullivan i just couldn't find the unmute button
oh great okay mr sullivan please identify yourself with a record spell your name for
this yes joseph a sullivan j-o-s-e-p-h middle initial a last name sullivan s as in sam
u l l i v as in victor a n your address i'm sorry and my address is 15 westview street
philadelphia 19119 don't really swear and affirm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but
the truth i do i have a question how close is uh your home to the application the property that
we're hearing occasionally. My home, it literally abuts the yard of the mansion. We share a common
property line. Okay, thank you. Mr. Sullivan, we have a letter from you to Mr. DiCicco,
the chair of the board here that we have on the screen, talking about your support.
If you could just summarize that in a couple sentences, could you explain to the board why
this is an important project for you? Yes, very quickly. I understand the timing.
I live in what was once the carriage house for 30 Pelham Road. Both the 30 Pelham and my house
are on the historic register. And as I said, we share essentially a backyard. I've been looking
at this deteriorating mansion for five years now. I used to know the prior owners, wonderful people,
but I've been watching this building fall apart over the last few years, and I know for a fact
from personal conversations that there were several attempts to sell it in its current
condition that were unsuccessful. I think this is the closest practical solution to renovating
a deteriorating property, and that preserves most, if not all, of the character of the
neighborhood. I think adding those four townhomes makes sense. They fit in with the rest of the
houses on that street, and they provide obviously some funding to help restore the mansion in an
appropriate way. And so you're preserving, in my opinion, a beautiful building. You're not having
minimum impact on the neighborhood, and you're actually adding a plus by creating four new
townhomes that look like they will be great. And I want to just mention, lastly, that the yard
that my house faces will be smaller as a result of these changes. But I have to say that even
with the changes, it's going to be a lovely property. I still have some good views from my
home. But my biggest interest is making a practical use of that building. Nobody will buy it as a one
family home and I would hate to see it carved up into six apartments or or even worse as a group
home or something else that really is not part of of the neighborhood. I think I've thought a lot
I've had a lot of time to think about this and I really think this is the best possible use of an
otherwise unusable space. Thank you Mr. Sullivan. Appreciate your time. Steve if you have others
Would you ask them if something new and different, please?
Jenna and John Conley, are you on the Zoom chat?
raise your hand
Raise your hand.
i don't see them anybody else okay let's try
huff and john gregory mcgan
hi this is megan huff hey megan um all right so the chair will swear you in good morning miss
megan i'm sorry your name again miss huff yes sir all right please uh spell your name identify
yourself with the record name and address sure my name is megan huff m-e-g-a-n-h-u-f-f and i live
at 6707 Cresham Road which is directly adjacent to the Pelham Road property. Thank you and do you
swear and affirm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth? Yes sir. Thank you
please proceed. Megan we have a letter from you to the zoning board that's we're sharing the screen
can you see it? Yes sir. Okay great can you just in your own words in a few sentences tell the
board why you feel this property is so important and why you support it well i would say i agree
completely with no she's getting ready to say is that already in the letter
i think it is yes because you're having her you know there's no point if she's gonna
give a testimony read the letter you know we're trying to cut time i think we passed already the
hour and instead of continuing you want her affirm if that's everything that's stated on
the letters true and accurate i think we'll save some time you know that that's a helpful
recommendation miss huff it's not that we don't we don't uh respect your testimony it's just
we're limited on time you got it i am not offended but i'm definitely a full supporter
okay thank you thank you all right do we have uh let's see here um paris hall
Paris, you can unmute yourself and speak
Okay, next one, Steve
Raymond Tatlow
Let's see
Here I do have a few other people with a hand up
I don't know if you want to move forward
Yes. I'm looking at my text here. Jenna Conley and Chelsea Badeau.
Hi, this is Chelsea Badeau.
Good morning. Please identify yourself, name and address, by your name for the stenographer.
e-h-e-l-s-e-a last name badeau b-a-d-e-a-u address is 607 east mount airy avenue
19119 you swear and affirm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth
i do you submitted a letter ma'am she did not uh mr chair okay okay she has a she was the
the last resident of the Fairlawn Manor. So I wanted her to testify as to why she supports this.
Yes, I'm the last resident. My family bought the home in 92 and lived there through January 2015.
We, my parents had 22 children and this was a wonderful home for our very large and, you know,
unusual sized family. But since that point, as several others have pointed out, this has not
been uh the sort of home that would work for many single families as they don't exist like ours but
i fully uh support what ken has laid out i drive by it since i only live a few minutes away
currently and i absolutely hate seeing the deteriorating state that it's in and i think
this would restore the house and also work nicely with the neighborhood so i'm in full support
thank you thank you thank you for your patience thank you for your time
and i think we have one more mr chair um jenna conley
i don't see her hand up however chair we do have um about five other people with their hand raised
it's your call um are these on your list are these folks on your list mr masters
i don't know who they are mr chair i don't know which ones are raising their hands i'm not able
to see that tanya could you give us a couple of names and we'll see if they're elaine peter amy
michael elizabeth they all have their right hands raised raised for testimony um well let's ask if
anyone is in support there could be some uh neighbors that are not in support so we could
put them in, they would be testifying at the end, I would imagine. If anyone is also is here for
supporting us, please unmute and announce yourself. They only get unmuted if I unmute them. Oh, okay.
Also, Chair, I have Elaine who has been here for a while, if I could allow her to speak.
Elaine you gonna meet yourself can you hear me yes please testify my name is
Elaine Hargrave E-L-A-I-N-E H-A-R-G-R-A-V-E and I reside at 36 Carpenter Lane
I'm a neighbor but not a near neighbor of 30 Pelham and I oppose this
development. The names on the petition that Mr. Weinstein just showed are not
necessarily neighbours of the project, they're scattered pretty far afield.
Between February 26th and March the 3rd,
some of the neighbours took the initiative
to circulate a brief survey around the neighbourhood
regarding the plans for the development of 30 Pelham.
Neighbours were contacted by email or surveys were hand delivered.
and the results were collated and presented to the We Man Zoning Committee, but unfortunately
they chose not to let us present the results at the Zoning Committee hearing.
The results showed that a resounding majority of neighbours, 80% of the 40 who had completed
the survey, disagreed or strongly disagreed with the question, I support the construction
of four new homes on Pelham Road in the rear yard of Fairlawn.
I've filed a graphic of that result and I've also filed additional comments
that were made by the 40 neighbours when they completed the survey.
A common theme running through their comments is that the proposals for two twin homes on the lot
are far too dense for the space. This viewpoint was vigorously echoed at the Weeman Zoning
Committee meeting by neighbors. The developer is touting the project as a restoration project.
However, the 1 to 1.5 million restoration costs that he has quoted are far outweighed by the
over 4 million that he stands to net from marketing six new homes on the land.
I also wanted to address the voting at the Weeman Zoning Committee meeting.
I attended the whole meeting. It was allowed to ramble on for hours. There was no set agenda
and the developer was given an extended period to speak, largely off topic.
The voting was shambolic. Raised hands at the end of the meeting were randomly counted in the
packed room without any thorough checks on whether households were voting singly,
whether voters were near neighbours, non-near neighbours or indeed neighbours at all.
The developer was allowed to vote twice. He voted once as a near neighbour, although he does not reside in the property.
Three committee members voted twice, despite protests from the audience.
They voted as neighbours and then they voted again within the committee.
And as it's already been mentioned, several neighbours left the meeting early because it was allowed to overrun substantially.
So many opinions were not captured at all.
the votes reported by Ralph Pincus who was not present at the meeting are unreliable and should
be discounted that's my submission okay we have um thank you thank you
Peter you can unmute yourself and testify hello hello can you hear me
yes okay so um I'm pretty much going to back which uh your name and address sir I'm sorry
My name is Peter Sioum, P-E-T-E-R, last name S-Y-O-U-M.
I live at 22 Westview, which is right around the corner from the property.
thank you do you swear and affirm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth
Thank you.
Do you swear and affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
i do thank you oh chair we also have a amy amy you have been allowed to speak you may testify
Thank you.
oh wait should i go yes i'm here should i speak yeah i think we got ahead of ourselves yes peter
please okay uh i'll be very quick um i i've um am against uh the the the the building the moving on
with the uh uh what the developers um of the property want i um totally agree with uh the
previous speaker um i do not believe that the neighborhood is um as the developer is saying
is in support um i was at that meeting um which occurred in march and as she said it um it was
it was a shamble of a voting process the um many people spoke against it the people who spoke for
it were um primarily connected financially um the developers voted um it was a it was a sham in a
lot of ways i um ultimately um at the very least and i've been not in on the whole meeting at the
very least there should be another vote a lot of the property um the plans that have been redone
the none of the the neighbors who are who are at the meeting have seen any of those things
um as far as uh like the democratic idea of whether the zoning board should help the developers make
a profit with these four other homes um i don't believe that's the that that is the goal and the
point of the zoning board um it should not be that we're here to make developers money
um absolutely correct uh i i that's all i needed to say thank you very much
uh chair um i would like to mention as a few others but we at the 1203 mark
uh so it is your call that's been over an hour yeah um maybe we can ask those who have not yet
spoke given their opinion to put something in writing and address it to
you to Tonya yes sure why don't you give them there the information yeah provide
them with the information so they can mail you or email you whatever yes but
you put emails on the chat for the RCO box please thank you
any more questions from the board no planning commission
hold on for just one second
i lost my recommendation this property is indicated for residential use on the comprehensive plan
the applicant is proposing new lots that need an excessive amount of variances including most
setbacks and open space additionally they do not without showing showing a signed plan they do not
meet the requirements of the whishikin watershed or steep slope and we ask the applicant in a
meeting to reduce to three new homes to reduce the variances during the plan review process
and they have not considered that today accordingly we feel that the application is proposing an
overuse of the property. Sharon, we're going to hold this case for 30 days until August the 26th,
but Sharon, I need some help from you. Is there anything else I needed to put on the record?
no just that the um hearing on august 26th will be a limited hearing only to give
any community member who feels they were not given an opportunity to voice their position
to testify
mr masters yes all right so we're going to hold this until august the 26th at 9 30 a.m
calendar number 39887
30 Pelham Road
being held
until August 26th
at 9.30 a.m.
In between, I would suggest
that you and on behalf of your clients
reach out to the Councilwoman's office
and whomever
else you need at the Mount Airy
Civic Association
so that
hopefully
we'll be able to resolve this issue
of the count and who was at the meeting who shouldn't have been there whatever we got some
work cut out for you yes we did thank you so much calendar number
Thank you so much, Mr. Chairman.
Calendar number 39889-423.
Hold on, Professor.
Professor, can we call up?
I'm going to burn a little bit out of order.
I believe it's calendar number 38167, 307 Friendship Street.
And this is the appeal that was mistakenly identified as continued.
It was not.
thank you so will the participants in the 307 friendship street please uh sign on
the um the appellant here is pro se she's not represented by an attorney
wow wasn't too happy with that hello hello good morning or good afternoon i should
say sorry name and address ma'am and please spell your name for the stenographer yes it's diane d-i-a-n-e
rodriguez r-o-d-r-i-g-u-e-z your address 307 friendship street philadelphia pennsylvania
19111 do you swear to firm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth
yes thank you please proceed um i don't know how to share my screen because i don't have that option
okay well walk us through it hopefully we'll be able to figure out what it is okay so the
first attachment that i sent is the closing document with my name on it diane j rodriguez
with my address uh the second attachment is the picture of my home and the problem is that i don't
i can't park my cars on the side lawn and i have my cars parked there so there's a picture of that
Diane, if you can hold one minute, I'm going to promote you to panelists.
And once you return, you can share your screen.
Now you should be capable of sharing your screens.
Okay, thank you.
Okay, all right.
Okay, can everyone see my screen?
okay so this is my um closing statement and it has my name right here with my address
and then this attachment is the picture of my house this is my house right here
this is the side lawn and i didn't know i wasn't supposed to park cars there but these are two of
my cars. So I was asking for a curb cut so that I'm able to park my cars there.
Ms. Rodriguez, can you hear me? Yes. It appears from these photographs that there are other
similar properties that have driveways. Is that correct? Yes. Yeah. So I just wanted to share
that the neighbors all my neighbors have driveways except mine so this is in front of my house they
have a driveway this is my next door neighbor 305 right here they have a actually sorry I got
confused because these houses look the same yeah this is my twin neighbor like my house is on the
other side. They're 307. They have a driveway. 303, they have a driveway. 306 has their driveway
here. And this is just a letter from my mom that she thinks that this is just a letter
recommendation so that i can your mom supports your application yes okay um and this is the
notice form refusal right yes and um it was received on last year july 26 2019
this is the project information form that was received on the same date and this is
the second page of that one and this is the application for appeal do you want
do you want me to read the question no i think we can see that thank you all right okay all right
me to read the question I think we can see that thank you all right okay all
you can summarize we'd appreciate that all right so um i would just like to have a driveway well
just a curb cut i don't i can't afford to um hire a pavement company yet but i do want to have some
sort of curb cut that way i can park my cars it will not damage anyone anyone's property um it
not endanger anyone in fact it will decrease the congestion congestion of cars parked on the street
so i just think it's just unfair that my neighbors have um driveways and i don't so i would really
like for this to get approved if possible okay thank you okay chair we do have hillary emerson
here for this case okay you are allowed to speak
mr emerson can you hear me yes please identify yourself with the record name and address
sure um good afternoon mr chair members of the board hillary emerson on behalf of councilman
sherelle parker um room 577 city hall 19107 um the councilman is not opposed to the request
in this case as the applicant noted there are driveways from you know front access driveways
along along many of the houses on the block the community did not have any opposition
to the applicant's request therefore we have no opposition thank you Hillary
anyone else tanya no chair you can continue thank you questions from the board no planning commission
chairman and members of the board this property is indicated for residential use on the comprehensive
plan we have no objection to the granting of the variance well thank you very much calendar number
38167 307 friendship street my vote is yes my vote is yes my vote is yes good luck thank you
so much everyone have a good day bye calendar number 39889 423 north 62nd street
Mr. Bertil, you have been promoted to panelists.
You can go forward.
Hello again, member of the board.
Good afternoon.
It's time.
Good afternoon.
Are you attorney for this proposal?
Yes, I am.
Good afternoon.
You agree to waive the reading of its refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Yes, I do.
Thank you.
Name an address for the record, please.
Steve Bertil from Claire Harrison Harvey in Brandsburg, 1835 Market Street, 14th floor 19103.
Thank you, Mr. Bertil.
You've already been sworn in, so please proceed.
Thank you.
Mr. Chairman and members of the board, I'm here with the owner, Mr. Mark Schundler, who should be here as well,
who at a certain point I'm going to actually adopt in my testimony.
So, Mark, if you could raise your hand so that they can be ready to click you over.
Members of the board, we're here to present regarding 423 North 62nd Street.
Essentially, what we're requesting is a variant approval to return the property
to its historical use as a two-family home. I'm going to share my screen now.
Can you confirm if you guys are able to see the PDF screen that I'm sharing?
Are you able to see the PDF screen that I'm sharing?
Okay, great.
So, as I stated, we're here, the variance requests that we're here for is for a change
of use we're requesting to return 423 north 62nd street back to um a two-family home uh the
property is currently zoned as a rsa 5 uh single-family home uh it sits on the 400 block of
62nd Street between Noble Street to the north and Cowell Hill Street to the south.
As you can see from my PDF, this is a photo of the exterior of the property.
As you can see from my pdf, this is a
Here's it looking down or looking up from Callow Hill, and here it is looking down from
Noble Street.
So as we stated, the property has historically been used as a multi-family home.
Exhibit that I'm about to show you is a prior zoning permit dating back to the late 60s,
I believe it was 1968, that shows that at one point the property was utilized as two units, an upstairs apartment and a downstairs apartment.
At some point, one of the prior owners before the applicant decided to stop using it as a multifamily home and started using it as a single family home.
And so we're trying to convert it back to that.
In addition to the historical context of the individual property, as you can see from this aerial view of the block that the property sits on, there are multiple multifamily homes and a commercial use on the street.
In fact, I believe there are six multifamily uses, some of which are actually three families.
so say that to show that the property is actually within not only within the
context of the individual property in its historical context but in the
context of the street itself all the all the work that we anticipate to
convert it back will be interior there's we don't anticipate any exterior work
essentially what we're doing is just converting converting the second floor
bedroom back into a kitchen so you can see the floor plans of the existing
layout of the property is here basement first floor second floor with the middle
room that was converted in the top bedroom and now I'm showing what the
post conversion of the layout would be is essentially identical the only
difference is that middle bedroom would be changed back into a kitchen and there
would be doors installed where at the bottom of the stairwell to divide the
units from each other. We met with the Registered Community Organization on May
31st virtually via Zoom. The community attendees voted in support of the
change of views as you can see by the meeting summary form that I'm presenting
on the screen now. In addition to the vote of support by the community
attendees, we also obtained signatures of support from near neighbors on the
block so you can see 422 424 420 415 425 436 and 446 excuse me north 62nd street are all
in support of this project
so in terms of refusal as i stated the refusal is just for the use only um then the proposed use of
a two-family dwelling because it's prohibited in this zoning district.
We believe that the requests of variances are de minimis and appropriate for the neighborhood.
As you can see from the context of the street, the fact that it's historically been used
as a two-unit multifamily home.
We also don't believe it will create any congestion on the public streets or transportation system
or really have any adverse effect on the adjacent properties in terms of supply of light, air, and
etc. Because as I stated, there is no exterior work to be done here. The only thing that we're
doing is converting the interior room back into a kitchen and installing some interior doors,
thus restoring it back to its original footprint. For all these reasons, we're requesting that the
guidance approval is appropriate. I have the owner Mark Schundler here. I would ask if he is raising
his hand if he can be selected and unmuted. This is Mark Schundler. Name is spelled M-A-R-K-S-C-H-U-N-D-L-E-R
and I'm at 4043 Walnut Street, Philadelphia, PA, 19104.
sir do you swear and affirm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth
So do you swear and affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
yes thank you uh mark have you heard my testimony this morning i have for this afternoon i should
say uh do you confirm the truth of my testimony and adopt it as your own i do
and with that uh with that uh mr chair members of the board i conclude
thank you uh questions from the board
planning commission
chairman and members of the board this property is indicated for residential use on the
comprehensive plan we have no objection to the granting of the variance thank you calendar number
423 North
62nd Street. My vote is yes.
My vote is yes.
My vote is yes.
My vote is yes.
All right. Confessor, before you call
the next case, Sharon.
Thank you. Sharon, I think you said
we skipped one?
I don't have a calendar number for that one.
I don't see it on
my list either.
Calendar 36978, 1708 Tioga Street, number four on the summary list.
I don't have that.
The one on our summary list was Powerhound Road, number four.
I don't have Tioga here.
I'm sorry.
No problem.
What is it again?
Calendar 36978, 1708 Tioga Street, attorney David Orfanides.
1708 Tioga.
thank you is this the one uh this isn't the swamp poodle one is it
no oh yes no okay no all right
is mr orphanetes available
Mr. Orphanides, you've been promoted to panelists.
You can share your screen as you need to.
Mr. Orphanides, you agree to wave the reading of its refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
I'll go through those during my presentation if you would like.
But I do wave the reading of it.
Can you hear me okay?
i heard it again we missed you huh can you hear me okay now yes okay so i waived the reading there
were there's some minor um minor inconsistencies in the notice of refusal that i can go through
if you'd like um during my presentation first of all do you swear to firm to tell the truth
the whole truth and nothing but the truth i absolutely do all right uh we're running into
a times issue because we are required to uh cease having a hearing at one by 1 30 correct tanya
yes chair so mr orphanetes please don't take up until 1 30. don't misunderstand my
my comments i got all my talk i got my all my talking done over the last two hearings
i appreciate that thank you can we ask too that before you start mr rafanidis i believe this case
went through cdr and that um the planning commission representative would usually start
by reading the letter into the record that that is correct that's the reason why our last original
hearing was continued i think back in uh david you're breaking up really huh one second let me
see something can you hear me better now a little better yeah well now you went off again
can you hear me okay yes and then when you begin to talk it seems like you fade out
i don't know i'm sitting at the same desk with the same computers as i did last week
well you wore it out last week i know apparently i guess i guess so i guess so all right let's
yeah i'm not i'm not sure what to do so but um so the planning commission needs to read the
read the report into the record first um chairman we were actually not going to we were going to
just say that they had completed the cdr process but we were also going to offer our recommendation
okay yeah the applicant has completed the civic design review process and but the Planning
but the Planning Commission indicates that this property is indicated for residential use on the
Commission indicates that this property is indicated for residential use on the conference
Conference of Plan. Even though the number of units has been reduced, this is still a single
family twin home district. While the applicant has mentioned mixed income, there is no enforcement
of that promise as they are not going through any city, state, or federal programs that would
enforce that number. We would recommend that if the ZBA grants multifamily at this location that
it would comply with the spirit of the RM1 zoning district, which would have a 38-foot height limit
and allow for approximately 28 units we would also ask that they put a deed restriction on
the property ensuring that there will be mixed income units as the community was promised
thank you all right and um just so everybody knows um exhibit 25 of my exhibit book which is
page 285 of my exhibit book is the CDR approval letter dated June 9th. As I indicated, we originally
scheduled for a hearing on 212, and that hearing was continued to allow us to go through the CDR
process. Because of COVID, that hearing did not happen, did not only happen remotely on June 9th
of 2020 as indicated in the letter you can see here with the mouse so we did complete that process
so i'm going to head back up to the beginning again my name is david orphanetes d-a-v-i-d
orphanetes o-r-p-h-a-n-i-d-e-s i'm with the law firm of orphanetes and toner and i'm here this
early afternoon on behalf of Two Eyes LLC which is the owner of the two
properties we're here for 1708 West Tioga Street and 1710 West Tioga
Street. In our exhibit book you hear our notices of the zoning hearing posting
and the notice of refusal. We have our taxpayer certification at Tad 2 for both
properties our deed showing two eyes llc as the owner of both of the properties
at tab scroll back here
so at tab four we have aerials of the subject property and the area surrounding it
our property they are two vacant two vacant lots in the Sanborn maps which I
can show you which are included later in our exhibit book for the benefit of mr.
Holloman they show that the properties went vacant sometime between 1989 and
1992 they are long and narrow lots you can see right here on the left on this
aerial image um they are each 25 by 250 feet in length um so each has a area of 6 250 square feet
together because the proposal is to consolidate the two blocks together and upon those lots
construct the proposed structure um there's 12 500 square feet the minimum lot area for rsc 3
This is an RAC3 zone lot. It does call for only single-family use. The minimum lot size is 2,250
square feet. As you can see, in addition to our lot, and I'll go through, which are right here,
as I'm circling with the mouse, which is the image number three and this first page of the aerials,
We are located between two lower attached or semi-detached structures that are set back from West Tioga Street that are used for multifamily dwellings and an eight-story building that's located to the east of us at the corner of 17th, North 17th Street and West Tioga.
ioga that structure is used for a multi-family building um and um see it's 45 long units
and zone cmx2 has no parking although it has a large open area to the south of it
and then there's a permit on the file for that property for a group practitioner on the lower
floors and here's that building is viewed from 17th street this is image four you can see the
open area here this is the building that's directly to the east of us a
stair tower that rises even above the existing stories very very very tall
building and here's a roll to the next aerials you can see our lot two lots or
this area here where the red dot is there's a lot of trees you see other
There's a lot of trees. You see other vacant lots located on the block, located the next block, the 1800 block of West Tioga Street.
vacant lots located on the block
As you know, we've been, if you may recall, this is one of several projects with the same different property owners, but the same developer who I believe is on the line.
Anthony, are you on the line? Can you raise your hand, please?
And, Kurt, if you could also raise your hand.
Kurt Raymond is the architect and Anthony Miles is the developer.
Would that person be attending via telephone?
Possible.
Is the number 237, last three digits?
Give me one minute.
look we haven't gotten down against this process down to confirm whether they are calling in or not
i have kurt raymond available to speak but i don't have the other name you listed
no i don't i don't recognize that phone number
um let me just check one thing
I know he texted me earlier on in the in the hearing so in any event we've had a
number of projects that have come before you with the same developer attempting
to inject some light, some development, some population into this area that with the article
that I've shown you in each of these cases has over the last several years been rated as the
worst neighborhood in Philadelphia. The lack of development, the extent of blighted lots or vacant
to that condition and my client is looking to do that um this here's a view here of our whole block
we have already been approved by this board for a development project at uh 17 um
just see where that is
included that approval that we came before you last year and that approval was for 1708 to 17
i mean 1718 west tayoga street and that was also a development for multi-family senior housing
as we are proposing in this situation.
So you have this block that has a large amount of multifamily dwellings.
Most of the dwellings that exist on the block, probably 80% of them are multifamilies.
Those that aren't are vacant lots.
There's a church with a large parking lot down here at the northeast corner of 18th Street and West Tioga.
But again, you can see the vacancies that exist other than where we are proposing to
develop and fill in the block.
Broad Street is a couple blocks to the east of us.
Here's a zoning map.
Here's a CMX2 zone property, the 8-story building that's located to the east of us.
South Bouvier or North Bouvier Street is this street right here.
unlike the property that we brought before you and this board approved for
the other senior housing development project this property does not back up
to South Bouvier Street it actually blacks up to backs up to properties that
run along coming off of North 17th Street so we backed up into the very end
of those properties and I'm just trying to give you a slightly better view here
than what is in my exhibit book um here is our here are our two properties right here
to the left of the purple which shown in purple and red which is a cmx2 and you can see that our
two properties back up into the backyards of a few properties here
that one property that we backed up to is this one right here um i'm not positive it's
occupied. Photographs of it that I can show you do not show it to be in great
shape. This is a view from the east. Our lots are running along this way to the
south of Tioga Street, just beyond the tall building located on the southwest
corner of 17th and West Tioga. Again, you can see that high number
17th and West Hale. And again you can see the high number of vacant lots in this
image as well. Exhibit 6 is our application. Originally the application
was for 60 units in a seven-story building. As part of the community
process we have reduced the number of dwelling units to 50 and reduced it to a
six story building again what we have it located right adjacent to us is a building that is eight
stories plus a stair tower that extends above it a very massive building that we're actually going
to tuck up up against um so it's very and we're not particularly wide so transitioning down uh
anywhere whether if we were to build to 38 feet you would have the very extremely tall existing
building that exists at the corner of 17th and west tayoga right next to us or we build our
building and you obviously have then the buildings to the west of us those buildings will be located
then between the building that we got approved at 17 18. here's the survey plan at tab seven that
shows the existing lots as i indicated 25 by 250 very extremely long and narrow that we're
consolidating into a single lot the A's are original zoning drawings which show
again a seven-story building called out for 60 units only had seven bicycle
spaces which was less than what was required we've increased that number to
50 as the revised proviso plan form and the revised zoning drawings will show
we basically lopped off one of the intermediate floors. The seventh floor
still has a floor-to-ceiling height of 11.6. Every other floor below including
the one that we took off is 11.3.5 floor-to-floor. I'm sorry the 11.6 is floor-to-roof
not floor-to-ceiling. This is the original site plan and Kurt can go
through this a little more detail West Tioga to the right below us is the
existing eight-story building the existing multi-families that are
located to the east of us beyond that then is where the multi-family senior
housing project that was developed was approved by the zoning board will be you
have a stair tower at the front towards the front an elevator penthouse towards
the middle front and then it's your second staircase an elevator pilot house
at the rear our refusals our refusals included the use refusal as Paula
indicated i've stated already the properties under rsa3 so multi-family is not prohibited
i mean is not permitted um it does cite the 60 that we originally applied for this is a refusal
dated 2.619 we've reduced that to 50. minimum required parking space rsa3 does have a one-to-one
parking requirement the other rsa3 properties that we brought before this board granted with
much less development other than the other project the senior housing project
on West Tioga that none of those have had parking the part of the plan and the
proposal of my client is they call it healthy town it's to kind of it's to
promote and Anthony if we get him on can speak to that at length he spoke to the
Planning Commission during the CDR hearing about the plans for both the
building that was approved to 1718 as well as this project at 1708 and 10 and the idea i'm here
okay great anthony i'll bring you on later on to adopt it and to go on thank you um okay but the
idea is to promote um well senior living but active senior living um and anthony can talk to
that the minimum open area is 50 we are at 29 um as in there is we kurt will go through the layout
of the building where we've provided the open area again we are tucked up against the large
commercial building to the east and the large open area which right now it doesn't appear to be used
but uh would probably be suitable for a parking lot but it's not um being it wasn't zoned as such
and then we do as i indicated back up to small pieces of the extreme rear yards of the properties
to the south of us um the front yard setback um required is eight feet uh
The front yard setback required is eight feet.
We are originally at five feet.
You'll see in the revised drawings, it's four in chains to the building face.
We have an awning off the front of our building,
that awning originally over the main entrance at West Tioga.
That awning originally extended all the way to the front property line,
so I'm thinking that the examiner measured the front yard setback to the awning.
We have set the awning back a little bit from the front property line by a foot and change.
You'll see on the revised zoning drawings.
But the large building to the east of us, again, the eight-story building,
multifamily building with close to the same number of units that we have,
the 45 dwelling units, granted not by variance, I don't believe,
but cmx2 does allow for not by variance for the use um because cmx2 allows for residential use
that building is at the sidewalk um the buildings to the west of us as you can see in the aerial
are set back we are somewhere in between the two of them in terms of our we're kind of splitting
the difference in terms of our actual building face but that is a um a refusal uh in the rsa3
zoning district the rear yard depth is 20 feet we're at 1.21 feet again in order to make the
project work and Kirk can speak to that we push the building back it is long and narrow it's not
a wide property particularly in relationship to its length it's oddly configured both individually
and together in that respect particularly given the zoning classification individually as I
indicated they're much larger than the typical zoning or lot size for the zoning district and
but again we back up to we run along the side the west side of that eight-story building
and then the open paved area which is not being used at the present time or i don't know what
the plans for the use of that are we are to the west of that building then we are to the north
of the other buildings that we back up to in terms of rear yard depth the
buildings to the west of us which are rentals multifamily rentals have large
rear yards as they are and whenever I've been out there do not appear to be in
use the height of the structure 38 feet is what's permitted again we originally
were at seven stories plus the pilot houses Kurt can talk about that the
pilot houses are a little bit over as you can see in the other refusals the the maximum square
footage that they can be just in general excited a refusal but also to not count towards the height
of the structure and Kurt will speak to why they need to be a little larger than 125 square feet
It has to do with the use of the building, but we have dropped that height down to 66, 5 1⁄2 feet to the roof.
It was originally at 76, 9, and then there's a pilothouse that extends 10 feet, 4 1⁄4 above that.
So that would put our present height at 76 feet, 10 to the top of the pilothouse.
again 66 five and a half to the primary roof again shorter and stories in the building to the east
and then again we have the roof deck access structures at the front and rear which kurt
can speak as to the reasons for those i believe initially there should have been a refusal for
the number of bicycle parking spaces it doesn't matter now because we've we're well in access of
what's required um it's uh one for every three units and we're at 50 and 50 or one to one and
that goes again back to the the concept that's being promoted here um i thought when i spoke
to the refusal and the the refusals and whether i can stipulate to its accuracy um the front
the front roof deck they said front for both access structures i believe this this one that
had the required five feet applies to the rear and that does not have the setback didn't have
the setback originally it's right to the back of the building and then the revised drawings
it doesn't either and then at the front i said two feet and i think it was one foot three inches
something along those lines so minor irregularities in your refusal both in terms of designated which
pilot house they were talking about and what the actual dimensions were but this was all
um the plans were the plans in this book for themselves and then our appeal project information
form um i we do have revised zoning drawings as i indicated um they are here at tab 11 of our exhibit
They are here at tab 11 of our exhibit book, and then the exhibit itself starts at page 51.
book which
And, again, you can see that per the RCO, I was not at the RCO community group meeting.
My client was there with the architect.
We do have a letter of support from that coordinating RCO, Tioga United Incorporated, or Inc.,
and also we have a letter of support from um uh state representative uh shereef street
and those are later on in our exhibit book um you can see we've indicated the difference between
the building face and the awning that i i mentioned earlier on in the revised drawings
the height to the primary roof um the number of uh dwelling units the number of parking spaces
or a number of bicycle parking spaces here is very similar to the original zoning drawings
uh shrink that here is the the layout of the building uh it is a semi-detached structure
here's the awning in the front that was relocated from the center of the building to the west side
there is a landscaped area that leads along the west side of the building that accesses at
different points. Plantings have been added. Street trees also, there should have been a
refusal for not having street trees in the original plan, and we've added those street
trees. Pilot house at the front, elevator pilot house a little bit back, and the rear pilot
houses so the revised drawings basically other than taking off the top floor
lowering the height of the structure reducing the number of dwelling units
this deck which was above the sixth floor roof at the seventh floor level is
now above the fifth floor roof at the sixth floor level to walk out community
deck Kurt will be able to go to the floor plans and answer any questions as
of those pool and gym bike storage in the rear all the floors are served by elevators throughout
and again i can have kirk go through the different layouts of the floor plans and answer your
questions regarding the same there's the tall building and then our building which is basically
going to tuck up into the side of that building we have this area right here which is further in
the forefront of the existing three-story buildings is where we are going to be building
the building that's already been approved by this board and is similar in most respects to the
building that we are already that we're proposing today elevations that have 14 shows the material
this is the west elevation that shows a lot of the plannings and the materials this is what was
presented to the CDR for CDR and the landscape plan that we have for the open
area to the west to the in front to the west side into the rear of the building
again what was presented to the CDR and that is a tab 15 and tab 16 shows the
massing of our proposed building as it compares to the building to the east of
us and other buildings across new 17th street i don't know how that slipped in there uh if you
would like to see photographs of this subject property in the surrounding area starting at
tab 17 the first page of which which is at page 68 of our exhibit book bladed property as you can
see um deteriorating front wall this is the building to the west of us i mean i'm sorry yes
And here you have at the bottom of page five, those buildings that are to the west of us.
Extending further to the west, the vacant, existing vacant lot that we've already been approved to build on.
Other existing multifamilies.
The building at the top of page eight, I believe, to the left of the one with the red awnings, is a single family.
Bottom of page eight, another multifamily.
Top of page nine, vacant lots at the corner of 18th and Tioga,
and then extending further on the 1800 block of West Tioga, multifamilies,
existing multifamilies, blighted buildings, burned out buildings,
vacant lots, further down all the way to 19th and Tioga,
a multifamily building which was developed down there not too long ago.
So vacant lots in the church and multifamilies, bottom of page 11 through page 12.
And then as you see of page 13, it's the north side of West Tioga.
All these buildings are being utilized, or most of them are being utilized for multifamilies.
Presently, you have a vacant lot, again, across the street, then heading down to 17th Street.
you have a vacant lot again across the street then heading down to 17th street you have uh
two small commercial buildings at the northwest corner a church on the northeast corner
um community center up to south east corner and then again the tall massive
uh existing building adjacent to us abiding us to the east on the southwest corner of 17th and west
tayoga on page 18.
the bottom of 19 is the building and the properties that extend from what
south 17th street behind our property and this is the wall of the building
directly to the east of us no windows or openings to speak of
that would be blocking there the sanborns i referenced earlier
showing structures existing similar to the other structures those that remain
on our side of on our south side of west the 1700 block of West Ioga they
dating back to 1921 but as I stated in 1989 you can see
right here you can still see the existing buildings and this is page 98 of our exhibit book
but yet in 1992 and since 92 they've been vacant you can see the large amounts of open area
that are located um to the south of us and again in terms of our structure extending to the south
we are to the north of those some of the development that you have to the south
of us so even with the reduced rear yard depth and the extra massing we won't be
shadowing those properties because of our physical location to them exhibit
19 is that road snack article that I've referenced every time I've come before
this board with one of the projects we're developing up in this neighborhood
10 worst neighborhoods for philadelphia for 2019 and this neighborhood was number one
and i believe per the article had been number one the prior year as well ranked last year
number one change so my my client is investing this has been several many years that he's been
involved in getting these projects many of which we've already brought to you including the other
senior multifamily on this block to try to rehabilitate and jumpstart this
neighborhood. Tab 20 has to do with their concept, their healthy living concept,
providing bicycles, making bicycles available for their tenants. And then a tab
21 and 22, 21 is the North 17th Street conceptual design for multicultural
for a multi-use redevelopment,
which I believe was a collaboration
between Tayoga United, which is the coordinating RCO here
and then other organizations that got involved.
And I've provided this in each of the cases,
the many cases we've brought
for the development project up here up in this area so i'm just going to scroll through that
then i think we also have uh here yeah here we go we have i think the planning commission's report
also you can find that just one minute
um leading up that was at tab 22 but i'm not i know we're pressed for time 23 um is the zoning
archive for our property 1708 doesn't have an archive and 1710 um has very very few documents
again i think the sandborns speak more as to the history of the property and then tab 24 is notice
of decision and the approved drawings as EVA stamp drawings and permitted drawings for 1718 West
Tioga. Again that was for 34 units on this on the single lot of 1718 West Tioga.
And here you can see that building.
That was a five-story building but obviously isn't tucked up against an eight-story building.
similar configuration to what we're proposing here basically essentially
identical in many respects. We already spoke, as we showed earlier, the CDR
completion letter dated June 9th with the commentary that we received at that
time. Tab 26 is the email we received or my clients received designated
Email we received or my clients received
Designated title of United as a coordinating RCO
the list of addresses to which the
14303 notice was sent
Page 295 you have the 14303 notice that went out for the community group meeting again
I wasn't an intent it was not in attendance and but my client and the architect were and can speak to
what might have transpired at that meeting, if there are any questions, and then starting at
page 297, you have our certificates of service of the 14, mailing of the 14303 notice to the
list of addresses that we pulled. We were provided by the, provided by the planning commissioner,
which we pulled up through the link, or were pulled through the link. I did not do the mailing,
um my client did uh as i referenced earlier tab 27 is our letter of support and i believe i stated
um state representative i apologize i realized as soon as i said it's our state representative i
said it's state senator reeve street his letter of support he does reference um issues with the
issues with the neighborhood and what we're trying to do here and then at tab 28 is a letter of
support from Tioga United, which does talk about reducing the number of units, which we did again
by taking off a whole story to go reduce from 60 to 50. So with that, Anthony, did you hear the
statements that I made to the board? Anthony, I need to get your name and address. Identify yourself
for the record please. Anthony. I'm going to jump to Kurt maybe. Kurt. Yes. Kurt. Chairman could you
swear Mr. Raymond in? Please identify yourself. Your name and address for the record. Kurt Raymond
N-K-U-R-T-R-A-Y-M-O-N-D, 1520 Locust Street, Suite 702.
Raymond, do you swear and affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Thank you. Please proceed.
Kurt, did you hear the statements that I made to the board?
I did.
And are they true and correct, to the best of your knowledge?
They are.
And would you adopt them as your own?
I would.
And Anthony, are you on yet, either telephone or otherwise?
he's on he has to unmute himself and speak
can you unmute
anyone else david while we're waiting for him
no he's um those are my two witnesses
all right well we're fine
all right um i would like to have him speak if he does come
he chimes in and obviously have him adopt my statements because some of them were outside of
what kurt would speak to okay oh anthony no this is tanya chair we do have three other people who
wish to testify um all right so uh members of the board i can have as i indicated kurt can run
through the design the changes that have been made the floor plans um for the sake of time
do you have my muted okay i'm going to come to you in a second anthony hold on do you have any
questions for kurt regarding the architectural elements of the um of the proposal that questions
for the board anyone board member have any questions no no i'm not okay let's go to anthony
Anthony, Mr. Cameron, would you swear Mr. Miles in?
Can you identify himself with a record, please?
Name and address.
Anthony Miles, 3900 North 16th Street.
Mr. Miles, do you swear in a firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Anthony, just real quickly, Kurt Raymond is the architect for the project, correct?
And his firm did all the designs for the project?
And he is the one who came with you to the community group meeting
and also was involved in the CDR submission and presentation?
And Anthony, did you hear the statements that I made during this hearing to the board?
And were they true and correct to the best of your knowledge?
And do you adopt them as your own?
Not to put you on the spot, but you heard Ms. Grumbelow.
all the projects that we've brought that i've brought with you to the board there's been an
there's been an element of affordable housing not that we qualified for bonus because of the zoning
element of affordable housing um not that we call
classification of the property but it was a commitment that you made to the community groups
and the commitment you made to the board to provide affordable housing even in those
lower lower smaller multi-family development projects miss brumbelow you proposed affordable
housing aspect to this proposal. You heard Ms. Brumbelow's request was suggesting that there
be a deed restriction or some more clearly defined commitment to providing that affordable housing.
Can you speak to that with what you might be willing to do for the board's benefit?
Yeah, we don't have any issues with, you were correct, that we made a personal commitment
to provide 15 percent of everything we build would have affordable component so we have no
issue with keeping our word uh on this project or the other project that we already got approved
and when we say affordable when we presented and the board would have no way to remember this
um we we were you we utilized the we were generally presenting the city's workforce housing
criteria in terms of affordable housing is that correct that is correct okay i mean straight from
the city that's we actually and some of the other matters that i presented with you we actually
provided and showed that information to the community groups and i think maybe even to
the zoning board at different times is that correct yes okay and that and you would commit
to that would you commit to that with a deed restriction as requested by ms brumbelow yes
okay all right um other than that real quickly anthony because the board is pressed for time
um and then there are some other people that want to speak or maybe maybe members of the board do
you have questions for i know mr miles is passionate about what he's doing up here and
let and he spoke very eloquently to the planning commission or the cdr members um would you like
to have him speak briefly or would you like to ask that like to ask him some questions i will just i
just i would just ask that any board member has any questions okay no okay so we can we'll go on
to the other two or three folks who i believe are waiting online and i just reserved the right to
call mr raymond or mr miles if i need them to address anything that gets raised by any understood
people that participate we have charles richardson on the line you are available to speak please
unmute yourself and testify mr richardson just identify yourself i swore you in earlier today
so identify yourself for the record okay charles richardson from councilwoman bass's office
uh anthony or david i had a quick question though i'm looking at the um letter of support that uh
tayoga united has said and i commend you for reducing the number of units to 50 but did you
see the sex had you had any consideration for that second piece that they had as far as a
They were making a request for parking on the block or something like that, for permit parking.
Had you given that any consideration?
We had, and actually that came up during our planning commission, the CDC, CDR meeting.
And Anthony, you spoke well about it.
It has to do, I mean, there's a couple things.
First of all, it's just coordinating that and making that happen is probably pretty difficult.
Providing for the permit parking up in the area.
So the issue up there could be parking, let's say.
Whenever I've been up there, there's been an abundance of parking, not an issue.
But we are introducing, between the other project and this, quite a number of units.
But that being said, the goal, and Anthony spoke to the CDR about this,
and you can speak to this real quickly, the goal of both 17, 18 and this project
is not to have and bring in, people may still have cars,
and cars may come and go to the, you know, both of the buildings.
But the whole idea of this project, the whole concept of this project,
and whether it's, you know, committing to the affordable side
through a deed restriction as Paula had recommended or requested.
but anthony speak real quickly as to why we don't think cars will be necessary or there won't be
that many or why we actually want to discourage david i appreciate that no disrespect there's
really no way of knowing if that will happen there are projects that start off with that
same intent then there are cars that come in and there's the opposite of that as far as the
permit parking was is the question mr richardson are you were you was the councilwoman or and or
the rco asking for the developer to make the application or pay for the application
to make the application or pay for the applicant for those parking permits for the other residents
for those parking permits for the other
on that block that's what they were doing but i don't know that that's necessarily enforceable as
as a proviso but then it's it's not like i'm not aware of it and i would bring this up i would
bring this up as well most i think it would be a different story in terms of that suggestion or
request if it was if they were owner occupied single family buildings up and down the block
or the surrounding blocks but they're not they're they're rentals they're multi-family and um so i
think i understand the idea and again when i've been up there i you know i haven't seen an issue
with parking but the i think the idea of then coordinating with renters on top of it and i
I think the idea of who you're trying to benefit,
longstanding residents versus transient people
that might, they're running one year
and then they're gone the next year.
I just think it's difficult.
And I don't know that what they're actually thinking
they want to achieve,
that condition actually exists here
in terms of who actually lives within close,
on this block or within the next several blocks up and down.
Gotcha.
Well, with that being said,
I just wanted to state that the Councilwoman
has no objection.
Thank you, Mr. Richardson.
Okay. Anyone else on the line, Tanya? We have someone with the number ending 845. If you wish, you can unmute yourself and testify.
Good afternoon, members of the board. My name is Veronica Holman, and I'm temporarily filling in as RCO for Tioga United. Do you want me to spell my name?
yeah please um veronica v-e-r-o-n-i-c-a holman h-o-l-m-a-n
and you swear and affirm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth
yes i did thank you please proceed ma'am okay um phila howard was the rco um with tayova united
but she is no longer with us.
Charisma Presley is now our new RCO,
but is not able to be here due to a major medical emergency in her family.
Tioga United RCO is asking for a continuance to ensure neighbors are properly notified
and has the opportunity to ask questions and voice their concerns, if there are any,
especially since there is a new multi-unit structure under construction next to this proposed unit.
Are you suggesting that there has not been an RCO, or you need an additional RCO meeting?
An additional so the community can come out and voice their concerns.
Well, didn't they have that opportunity with all due respect?
because the person that was there before we really don't know what all um took place i
don't remember this i haven't been with them for long but i don't remember this happening
david could you address that briefly please yeah sure um i mean there's a couple things um
everybody when 1708 and 10 went through the process everybody was aware of 1718 as well as
many of the other um projects that we've brought for this community before this board it wasn't
just coming in piecemeal in fact there were some there you know we originally tried to do it
collectively as one large lake which overall scattered sites project is what we were calling
it um so everybody and in fact their letter from june 25th if you see right here where i'm pointing
my pointer the developer presented the rendering of the already approved 34 unit building at 1718
west tayoga handed out floor plans with rendering of the proposed 60 unit building at 1708 and 10
west tayoga so it's clear that at the meeting that they had back in 2019 that they everybody
knew about 1718 it was on the table they known it had already been approved um we did the mailing
to everybody that we were required to do the mailing uh and everybody came out i think you know
because there's a change in leadership uh and particularly at this late point i mean i would
have really appreciated no offense um but i would have appreciated the contact sooner than the day
of the zoning board hearing to let us know that there was a need for even a desire for another
meeting we very well could have complied in some way even if it was remotely or virtual but I think
complied in some way even if it was remotely or virtual but i think it's very late in the process
it's very
to do this i will say my client is going to come back before this group and other groups up in the
area for other projects he has created and cultivated a very good relationship with people
in the community and wants to keep doing that i think that he will continue to have an open ear
and a dialogue with this group and other groups and if they want to have a meeting afterwards to
talk about it i'm anthony i hope you don't mind but i'm volunteering your time um to go there
and uh speak with i want to interrupt you i would also suggest if you do that that you contact mr
richardson oh yes councilwoman's office and let her know that you're you know willing to have
further discussion but we're not going to continue this case all right okay uh anyone else no chair
i saw you can continue thank you any questions from the board
planning commission i know you made an earlier statement anything else you need to add
we have no further comment thank you calendar number three six nine seven eight one seven oh
eight tayoga street my vote is yes and they were proviso we've got revised plan yes sir how many
pages one page revised plan one page and that was the other proviso maximum 50 units i mean that's
in the revised plans that's in the plan okay my vote is yes with revised plan one page stamp today
yes with proviso yes with proviso thank you all does that conclude the uh 9 30 session
yes all right you made it at 113 you said to 115 right yeah right you get points
if i didn't if i if i didn't cut you short you would have went over oh no i was watching the
all right uh we'll see everybody at uh two o'clock tanya yes chair thank you thank you everybody
appreciate it yeah she's on I think oh yes I'm here thanks Charisse you're
welcome are you ready yes thank you good afternoon everyone my name is Frank
DiCicco I'm the chair of the zoning board of adjustment we have a quorum I'm
officially calling this session to order. In attendance is our secretary, Mr.
Confessor Plaza, our board members, Mr. James Snell and Mr. Thomas Holloman, in
addition to Sharon Saleta, our city solicitor, and our board administrator,
Ms. Tanya Sunken. While you may have, while we may have to make some
adjustments along the way, our plan is to call each case and basically proceed
as we would have in a live hearing we ask that attorneys for applicants or
other interested parties identify themselves for the record when the case
you'll be participating in is called we will then hear the appellant's
presentation followed by any presentation by attorneys representing
other parties interested parties and members of the public not represented by
counsel will then be given an opportunity to testify we will finally
hear the recommendation of the planning commission. At the hearing's conclusion the board will either
vote the matter immediately or hold it for discussion in the next session. Any case held
for discussion will be voted on the record at the next scheduled meeting August 5th, Wednesday
August 5th at 9 30 a.m. A couple changes related to the virtual format. First we will be ministering
administering oaths to individual participants to their testimony rather than to the room as a whole
since we do not have a room. Second, for the benefit of anyone participating by phone,
we ask that attorneys and witnesses identify themselves prior to speaking or testifying.
Third, I'd like to ask everyone, I'd like to advise everyone that this proceeding is being recorded
and that by your participation you acknowledge your agreement to be recorded and at the time
your case is called if you wish to testify you please raise your hand so that Ms. Sunken can
identify you and pat you in for a we can hear your testimony asking all the attorneys to please
limit your testimony to those issues that are extremely necessary for the record we will limit
We're going to limit each case to no longer than one hour.
each case to no longer than one hour.
Let's see.
And I think that we can begin, Mr. Confessor Plaza.
Sorry about that.
Calendar, these are the cases that are continued.
Calendar number 38160, 1366 Anchor Street.
Also calendar number 39273, 1615 South Broad Street. Calendar number 39120, 1816 South 18th Street. Calendar number 39873, 2408 Stewart Street.
calendar number 39199 2433 harland street calendar number 39180 3517 north 15th street
also calendar number 391295425 hunter street is there any other request are there any other
request for continuances if so please raise your hand so we can identify good to go
we have another request we have a couple hand raised diane mitchell diane hamilton mitchell
Ms. Mitchell, please identify yourself in the record. Spell your name for the stenographer,
please. Yes. D-I-A-N-N-E Hamilton H-A-M-I-L-T-O-N hyphen Mitchell. M-I-T-C-H-E-L-L.
Ms. Mitchell, do you swear and affirm that your testimony will be true to the best of your
ability yes i do thank you please proceed hold on is she asking for a continuance i don't know
it's what i'm asking no we're asking to hear we're here for the hearing the zoning for the property
at 1325 south 15th street uh we're 13 25 south 15th you're not away we're not on that we're not
on that case yet you're not asking are you asking for a continuance no we're not we're okay okay
then you wait wait for that case to be called okay thank you sir thank you any other anyone else
Request for a continuance or withdrawal
Franz Pierre
Hello can you hear me
Can now please identify yourself for the record
Spell your name for the stenographer
Yes that's Franz Pierre
Councilmember Johnson's office
That's F-R-A-N-T-Z
Last name Pierre
That's P-I-E-R-R-E
And good afternoon Mr. Chairman
And fellow board members
it's been a long time um i was uh looking for a continuance for a calendar number three nine nine
zero nine i'm not too sure if you mentioned that no no that's what
okay wonderful uh 2736 the council member uh that's 2736 federal street the council member
would uh like to see a continuance in order for both parties uh to come to a mutual um agreement
what is that calendar number again three nine three nine nine zero nine that's correct
2736 Federal Street. Okay. Is there any objection to that request? Allen? Is it Allen? No.
I believe Henry Clinton is present to object to the request. Okay. Mr. Clinton?
Mr. Clinton, if you're here, raise your hand, please.
Tonya can you see my hand no but I admitted you you can speak we could hear you okay good afternoon
mr chairman members of the board uh i think you know what high esteem i hold councilman johnson
I think you know what high esteem I hold Councilman Johnson in, as well as Frantz-Pierre.
in as well as francis
Mr. Clinton, just get your name and everything on the record, please.
Henry Clinton, C-L-I-N-T-O-N, on behalf of 2738 Federal LLC, and my client, Colin Lahren.
And Mr. Clinton, you swear in the firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and love you about the truth?
Thank you.
Please proceed.
So thank you again.
I hold Councilman Johnson and Franz Pierre in high esteem, and I don't think I've ever disagreed
with that office, but on this one, I have to. This project has been thoroughly vetted by
four community groups in Grace Ferry. We have a letter of support signed off on by not only
Grace Ferry Community Council, but all the remaining RCOs in Grace Ferry, so for a total
of four. We have made every wish that they've asked come true. We've changed the dimensions
of the building. We've set back the building. We provided affordable units. We provided an
opportunity for the community to meet there at the site and several other items. So to get
a consensus among four groups in Grace Ferry, I think is quite an accomplishment. The request,
i believe from the councilman come from an adjoining our owner who we have engaged since
november of 2019 we continue to try to engage with them but we have not been able to get them to come
to the table in full discourse we were sent a an email sunday evening which i've shared with the
with counsel Sharon where a number of requests were outlined and there were
five issues raised three of the issues apparently are resolved and there are
two remaining issues so I don't know why we need a continuance this project is
ripe it has full community support and when the bar owners did not appear via
zoom at the community meeting and i believe they will acknowledge a notice was delivered we
immediately called them the next day and said you know where were you we have a zoning hearing today
and i alerted them to that so we just see this as a last minute appeal we understand the council
was asking for it but when all the true facts are known it really is an eight month delay in
trying to get information from the individuals who are asking for the continuance. So for that
reason, those reasons, we would object to that. Plus, two of these three lots are already owned
by my client. The third lot is under agreement, and the agreement has already been extended
on two occasions, and we've been advised that the seller is not going to give any more continuances.
So for all those reasons on the record, I kind of request that the chair and the board look at the facts surrounding the situation and permit the case to go forward.
oh mr clinton thank you uh if this board were to make a decision to continue the case two weeks
from now and i'm not sure if we can do that tanya would we if if we make a decision could we limit
it to two weeks we can attempt to if it depends on if it would be a full hearing or not because
we already have cases scheduled if you were to hear it today and continuing only for again the
limited purpose of hearing testimony from the parties that are requesting it right and it is
unusual that you have four rcos all on agreement uh not unusual but it is certainly noted by this
board. Mr. Franz, Mr. Pierre, would a two-week window be helpful? Yeah, I think a two-week
window is perfect timing just to get, you know, everyone else on the same page in regards to
the adjacent business owner that just didn't have the time to work on the negotiations
with the applicant.
I'm sure that Mr. Clinton would disagree with that part of it,
but Henry, two weeks, could you live with two weeks?
Mr. DiCicco, you know I've been flexible in every matter,
I think, ever before the board.
This is an unusual circumstance where the client basically sees
the the client basically sees a continuation as a cancellation of the project and i don't want to
a continuation as a cancel.
put the chair and the board in a difficult situation uh as sharon not to interrupt but
as sharon suggests we'll hear the case but we'll hold off for two weeks on any decision
is that what you're suggesting sharon as an alternative either hearing it today and voting
or if you do decide to continue to or even I mean given the amount of time that's passed
one week with the neighbor able to submit make a written submission or testify briefly at the next
session your call of course yeah I know I'm trying to be trying to be helpful as best we can I know
Mr. Clinton makes a strong argument, but we're trying to accommodate the councilman's office as
well to see if there's a mutual understanding. Mr. DiCicco, do you think it would be
within the board's purview if I were able to get my client and the objecting party and
Franz Pierre on a call and come back to you at the end of the calendar and perhaps between now
and then this can be worked out work for us if that works for p the councilman's office
it is the objecting party on the call it works for me um i'm not too sure if the
not the applicant the uh neighbor that's involved will be available um i think i think a week would
be sufficient if we can't do two i think a week from now um hearing the um in taking the testimony
hearing the appeal i think a week from now should be sufficient for the neighbor and um the applicant
to work something out then we can hold it for discussion and vote on it next wednesday at 9 30
a.m can i ask is the objecting neighbor even on this call i i don't know if the objecting neighbor
is on the call please raise your hand
nothing
apparently not i assume mr pierre that you would reach out to the objecting
neighbor yes sir so henry
we'll hear the case and uh hold the decision until next
wednesday i i think uh that appears the best to be the best alternative uh hold on my my client's
texting me
Pierre's involvement and Ms. Saleta's and yours intercession. So that would be fine with us.
Okay. And again, we will definitely make a decision next week.
All right. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, Pierre.
Thank you.
Mr. Pierre. Thank you.
Okay. We're ready for the first case.
Professor.
he was checking out those yellow roses see how they're coming along
calendar number we are in the first one right federal street calendar number three nine nine
zero nine twenty seven thirty six federal street
yes okay mr clinton you've been sworn in that please proceed
Mr. Clinton, do you agree to waive the reading of his refusal and stipulate to attack IRC?
Thank you.
This is 2738 Federal Street.
The client's name is Colin Lauren.
The architect is Derek Spencer of Nome Architects.
They both will be witnesses on this project.
And we have an evidence binder, exhibits A1 through A12, which the architect will scroll through as we get into the meat of the presentation.
So by way of background, this project is on a block that's zoned entirely I2.
The board may not recall, but I've been in front of the board on at least two occasions.
The board may not recall, but I've been in front of the board on at least two occasions on other
projects on this particular block. In one instance, there were a couple single-family homes that the
board said would be a viable project in I-2 down at the end of the corner. And just within the year,
year and a half, directly across the street, there was a project, a four-unit project that the board
approved with one parking space this particular project is a consolidation of three lots into one
and the proposal is to build an apartment building with 24 units in the building
if you look derek if you could scroll down to exhibit
A11 and tell me when you have that and Derek I want to confirm you're on the call
I'm sorry you have a witness you're trying to yes Derek Spencer
there he is
yes I'm here Hank
can you scroll down
to A11
will Mr. Spencer be testifying
Mr. Spencer please spell your name for the stenographer
and identify your address
no problem
My name is Derek Spencer, D-E-R-E-K-S-P-N-C-E-R.
Address is 1901 South 9th Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, 19148.
And do you swear and affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Thank you, sir. Please proceed.
Mr. DiCicco, Mr. Spencer is the architect of record here.
And Derek, if you have the shared screen, can you scroll down to A11?
Hank, I do not believe that I have the capability to share the screen right now.
I'm not quite.
This is my first EVA here in a Zoom call, so I'm not sure how this works.
Don't be too concerned.
I'm still trying to figure it out myself.
Okay, no problem.
Hank, were you talking about page 11 of the presentation I put together?
Well, no, page 11 of my table of contents, which are the photographs.
or Tanya can you let me take over the screen or you have a capability it's
just he doesn't who wants to share the screen me I'll do it yes you're a
panelist so you have my exhibit Tanya you can share your screen you're a
Panelists.
Well, let me do this verbally so I don't eat into the airtime here.
But anyway, the 2700 block of Federal Street is zoned I-2, both sides of the street.
Within a year, a year and a half, I presented to the board a project right across the street.
It's a four-unit building with one parking space.
This particular project is directly across the street.
It fronts on Federal Street, but really looks over Grace Ferry Avenue and has a direct beeline to Center City.
the project will have four stories with the fifth story set back the height is 57 feet
in the back there will be four parking spaces there will be an office in the basement which
the community group can use as a conference room and it will have a rooftop deck the
The community groups in the area, coordinating RCO is Grace Ferry Community Council, we reached
out to them in the end of 2019 concerning our project. We met with them on several occasions,
which was climaxed in our meeting with four community groups last Thursday, which is July
23rd at that meeting there were a number of changes made and i wanted to run by those those
changes with the board we've submitted a proviso sheet which discusses some of the changes which
is we move the fifth floor black back 10 feet on the front and the rear we also
also have parking spots in the rear four spots including one handicap we also have park bike
have parking spots in the rear four spots including one handicap
bicycle spaces in the basement of the facility and we have a conference room in the basement of
the facility one of the chief points of discussion and france pierre was on the call was how could
we make this project compatible with the needs and the wants of the community and one of the main
driving forces was a request for low-income housing and as the chair and the board may know
low-income housing is a is a different level than workforce housing or affordable housing
and through France Pierre's intercession and general discussion we were able to come to a
resolution that our my client would offer three units for at least five years after the project
is done at an affordable level. I don't want to get into the minutiae because the level of rental,
monthly rental of each of the units is referenced in the Exhibit A to the community group's letter
of support. But basically, we've capped the rents at certain numbers, which would be 50% of AMI,
or if it's lower in coming years, which it may, we would go down to the lower rentals to
accommodate the community groups. We also agreed to add the additional, the neighbor that is
adjacent to us that owns the bar at 1201 South 28th Street. We agreed to add them as an additional
insured on our insurance policy. We also agreed that all four community groups, not just one,
but all four community groups would have the opportunity to use an office in the basement
for their quarterly meetings, as long as they would give us a heads up concerning what their
schedule is and when they would be meeting. We also talked to the group about contacting the
adjacent neighbor, who is apparently requesting this continuance, even though she's not on the
call. The neighbor was not at the community meeting, so we told everyone at the community
meeting that we would reach out the next day and advise the near neighbor that the zoning board
would be having this call today. So I'm surprised that she's not on the call, but I understand she
may have other commitments. So after that meeting, which is about an hour and a half,
we did reach a consensus and in my exhibit package which is part of the
record at Exhibit A8 there is a letter of support from the Grace Ferry Community
Council along with an Exhibit A which outlines the various provisos that we
agreed to and all four community groups signed off on. Their signatures may not
necessarily be on the document but they signed off via email to the president of
Grace Ferry Community Council, who is Carmine Zouli. We
have submitted a proviso sheet at exhibit tab 810, outlining for the board what the changes are,
and I would like to highlight a few of those. In the beginning of this project, we had proposed
commercial use of the first floor and the basement. In meetings with the community,
It was clear that they did not want commercial.
They just thought that Federal Street, which is right off of Brace Ferry Avenue, is an
area that has no traffic signal or traffic light, and they didn't think that a commercial
use would be viable there.
So we agreed with that, struck that from the plans, and basically made that area into residential,
which is the project that we're presenting to you today.
So our proviso plans are at A-10 if the board does look kindly upon this application.
In terms of parking, there's four spots behind the building.
We've also reached out to McDonald's across the street, directly across the street from the project and maybe a half a block down.
If those on the board may be familiar with Diamond Tool, Diamond Tool is a neighbor which is immediately east of our project.
and the Diamond Tool has about 20 parking spots that they use from McDonald's.
I've been in contact with Diamond Tool about the process that they've used for that.
I also can let the board know that Bottom Dollar,
which is another commercial establishment on Grace Ferry Avenue,
approximately one block away, excuse me, two blocks away,
we've been in contact with them to use their area for additional parking and I
to use their area for additional parking and i bring this up to the board this was not a concern
bring this up to the board
of the community group of any community group i shouldn't say a concern it was not a heightened
concern of any community group or grace very community council they had just previously
approved a four unit building across the street which has one parking spot so approving 24 with
four parking spots was basically in the ballpark uh this comment to you concerning the parking
is to address what we understand is one of the objections of the the bar owners next door
so we're trying to preempt that criticism by letting the board know that the parking
will can be provided for now we may disagree on those numbers of of extra spots we understand that
the adjacent bar owner is looking for you know an enormous number of parking 18 spaces and we're
more in the area of of eight spaces because you know even were this in a uh an art if it was rm
rm1 we wouldn't be required to have any parking at all frankly
so i wanted to see if colin lauren is on the call colin is my client
Colin. Mr. Chico can you still hear me? Yes I can. Mr. Lauren are you still on the
call? Yes I'm on the call can you hear me? Yes. Yes. Please identify yourself
with the records by your name for the stenographer. Colin Lahren, C-O-L-I-N
Last name, L-A-R-E-N.
Your address?
Mr. Lauren.
Hey, Hank.
Have you heard my testimony?
If you had the opportunity to testify in this hearing, would you adopt my testimony as true and correct and as your own?
Thank you.
Any other witnesses, Mr. Clinton?
no other than derek spencer who can go through the floor plans with the board and explain the
the layout if if so inclined any board member have any concern about the uh
no no all right uh is there anyone else on the line
mr chairman i didn't hear you i think france pierre want to say something
Yes, the neighbor, near neighbor is on the line. Her last four digits are 0605.
And does she want to testify or something?
I'm sorry. Yes, she does want to testify.
Her name?
Diane.
Diane.
yeah by yourself your first and last names by your name for the stenographer
diane d-i-a-n-e hannah h-a-n-n-n-h-h hyphen wilson w-i-l-s-o-n and your address
one the address that we are um speaking of specifically is 1209 south 28th street
and 1201 south 28th street philadelphia pa where do you live i live at 115 drummond farms lane
newark delaware 19711
what is your connection to this project we are owners of both properties
that are affected by this new construction.
Please state your concerns.
Our concerns specifically are we have no problems with progress going on in the Graceberry area,
the area which was formerly known as Martin Luther King's Village Service Area.
Our concerns are that the needs of our parking, which represents a community that expands
beyond two blocks, has not been met.
When we initially met with the developer, as well as the attorney, we expressed our
We expressed our concerns then. I felt that it was overall a meaningful and a meeting. We left from that. There was additional work that we were doing to follow up on specific things, and we did that.
concerns then.
I felt that...
But after that COVID-19 hit, and we were advised constantly, not necessarily by the builder
and his attorney, but we were advised by the city that absolutely nothing was going on.
We did not have an opportunity.
Excuse me, I need to interrupt you.
You keep referring to we.
Who is the we?
I'm sorry.
My husband, Jack M. Wilson, who's also here with me.
He lives with you.
Yes, he does.
All right. I'm trying to, what I'd like to understand is, how does this impose an inconvenience for you?
It directly impacts our business, both businesses, specifically the laundromat, because if we're building a unit of 2022 apartments,
There has been no consideration for the parking, which will be direct.
The residents have to park their cars somewhere.
It is unrealistic to believe that a unit that houses 20 people, and I'm quite sure it will be beautiful, but it's unrealistic to believe that a unit that will house 20-some people, that we will not be impacted, our business will not be impacted,
because our customer base is not pedestrians.
Our customer bases come from as far as 31st, 36th, and Reed, Taster, Morris,
and they drive there.
So if there's nowhere to park, based on the fact that there is no consideration
for parking within the immediate area of where the construction is going on,
where people will live, we will be impacted by that.
And what we were hopeful of, what we would like to do, as well as our bar, what we would like to do is have an opportunity to see what other resolution can be made or consideration be made for this project so that parking is designated specifically in this project for his residents, for the residents of this building.
Did I hear you reference your boss?
no bar i'm sorry i didn't hear it again bar b-a-r bar oh your bar your bar business right
right we have two businesses that what is affected by federal street and the other
is affected by manton street and we will absolutely have no place for our customers
to park.
I understand your concern,
but the immediate neighbors,
four recognized community organizations
have also gotten behind this project
to support it.
And they're the ones that are going to be,
they will also be impacted by
potential for a reduced number
of one street parking spaces.
But yet they still came out,
they came out in support of it.
And they did not invite me.
I was not made aware of a community-based meeting by any of the RCOs where I would have had an opportunity, as well as my husband, to express our concerns.
I understand, after the fact, that they represented any potential construction concerns to the bar.
They did not think about or give any consideration whatsoever to the laundromat.
and the laundromat is a business a laundromat is the business that we have a lot of drive up
traffic we understand that we understand we understand well i don't know i don't know if
you were if you were notified or not but again overwhelming majority of the people who reside
in that community did attend the meeting apparently and they support the project
but i do appreciate your your testimony anyone else to testify
no chair no one else's hands is up all right are there any questions from the board
planning commission no
this property is indicated for use on the city plan the applicant has not demonstrated
a necessary hardship regarding the requirements of the code we believe it's an inappropriate
we believe it's an inappropriate overuse not consistent with our adopted district plan
overuse not consistent with our adopted district plan
recommend the request for variance not be granted what is briefly drawn the adopted city plan
is for what not the district plan does recommend this for industrial this is being converted to
uh residential but however we do believe that intensity of residential at that location
is not appropriate. Thank you. All right, as I said at the onset, and I think Mr. Clinton and
Mr. Pierre have agreed, this board will hold this for further discussion, and we will vote on this
matter next Wednesday, August 5th at 9 30 a.m. Good luck. Just one minute to clarify, the record
will remain open and the um the neighbor who wanted to have additional input will be permitted
to either make a statement or have a statement read into the record prior to the vote thank you
sharon thank you next case please and and sharon could i also the record still remain open to me
in case i need to respond yes of course thank you calendar number three nine six four six
12 15 south 23rd street
Alan, you there?
Give me one second.
Alan, you've been promoted to panelist. You can speak and hear your strength.
Yes, can you?
Yes, we can hear you.
Can you read away from the reading of its refusal and stipulate to attackers?
Yes, I do.
Please identify yourself.
Good afternoon.
My name is Alan Ockamson of Ockamson, PC, 123 South Broad Street, Suite 1600, Philadelphia,
PA 19109. I handed you a packet of materials, which include eight exhibits. The first exhibit
is the, well, first, before I start, I have Ghazi Ada Seven as the owner's representative.
Alan, would just identify the case that you're working for, and do you swear to the firm to
tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? Yes, I do, Mr. Chairman. The address
of the property is 1215 south 23rd street um with me is got ghazi out of seven who's
the owner's representative um i would like to swear mr out of seven in okay would they raise their
hand. Okay he can unmute himself and speak. Okay I think you can hear me now. Okay could you please
identify yourself with a record name and address spell your name for the stenographer. Yes my name
is Kazi Atasevan. I'm the representing of Maestro Real Estate Development who owns the property.
His name is spelled G-A-Z as in zebra eye, last name is A as in Anthony, T as in Tom,
A as in Anthony, S as in Sam, E as in Edward, V as in Victor, E as in Edward, N as in Nicholas.
And do you swear and affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
Thank you.
Please proceed.
Trying to see about sharing my screen, having a little difficulty here.
But, you know, I did hand you a packet of materials, which include eight exhibits.
The first is the adventure to the property, showing that Maestro Real Estate and Development LLC owns the property.
The second exhibit is the Certificate of Tax Clearance, showing that they're in tax compliance with the city.
The third exhibit is the notice of refusal.
This is an RSA-5 property.
I would also point out that we received an updated refusal,
which I sent to the ZBA's administrator this morning just to make sure that, you know,
the vote is going to be based on the updated revised refusal,
which was allowed to be submitted to L&I by way of permission.
allowed to be submitted to lni by way of permission as well but this is an rsa5 property
and we're seeking to put a two-unit condominium building in here i would note if you looked at
the lni file this property has never been used as a single family structure at one point it was
actually used as a five unit apartment building with a commercial component in it so we met with
the community group the south philadelphia homes inc uh before you know covet 19 we met with them
in person and they the people in the group as well as the zoning committee voted unanimously in favor
of the project um if you if the chairman would like i can you know go through a full
presentation or i can take questions
unless there is any questions from the board and or are there any uh folks who uh wish to testify
on the on in this matter you see any hands up tanya not at this time chair okay so
So why don't we summarize, Mr. Notkinson?
So, again, notice refusal dated for May 13th of 2020 under application number 0, Philadelphia-2020-001376.
We're looking to put a two-unit condominium in a property which would otherwise require single-family use.
property's never been you know used as a single family structure and we met with the community
and they're unanimously in support of that uh mr at a seven you heard everything i stated today
i heard it and is it true and correct yes and would you adopt it as your own testimony yes
okay thank you questions from the board no planning commission so given the property history
this property is indicated for residential use we have no objection to the granular variance
thank you ron all right calendar number three nine six four six one two one five
south 23rd street my vote is yes my vote is yes my vote is yes good luck thank you very much
Calendar number 39447, 1325 South 15th Street. Mr. Allen, you agree to waive the reading of
its refusal and stipulate to its accuracy? Yes, I do. Good afternoon, Mr. Chair, members of the
board. I'm still Allen Ockamson. I'm still located at 123 South Broad Street, Suite 1600,
Philadelphia PA 19109. And I also handed you a packet of materials which include eight exhibits
for this zoning matter as well. Along with me for this presentation are several individuals.
First, the owner of the property, Chuck Zachney, a representative of his team who's going to be
selling these hopefully condominium units, Dennis Conwell, who's a licensed realtor in town,
as well as the architect on the project, Christopher Johnson.
I would like to swear those individuals in.
Please do so.
Charles is unmuted and allowed to speak.
Is there anyone else?
They would need to raise their hand.
who uh alan who's the other names oh i'm sorry uh it's on my table of contents dennis conwell
who's the owner uh who's the uh uh the real estate agent for this project as well as christopher
johnson the architect i mean if most importantly we would need mr zachney who's the property owner
to verify what I say is true and correct.
Unless we need the architect, we'll just go with him.
Thank you.
They're available to speak.
They can unmute themselves.
Chuck Zachney, C-H-U-C-K-Z-A-C-N-E-Y, 361 Vista Drive,
Phoenixville, Pennsylvania, 19460.
Sir, do you swear and affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Thank you.
All right, Mr. Chair.
I'm going to try to share my screen for this one.
I'm going to see if I'm going to be successful this time.
Actually, I don't see the actual presentation materials.
Darn it.
all right well how about we try to do it i did hand in a packet of materials which include
All right.
Well, how about we try to do it?
I did hand in a packet of materials, which include...
eight exhibits the first exhibits the deed to the property showing that mr zachney purchased
the property in july of 2019. the second exhibit is the certificate of tax clearance showing that
mr zachney is compliant with his obligations to the city of philadelphia the third exhibit
is the notice of refusal this is also one where we amended the zoning appeal
So I note that the date of the notice of refusal is March 17th of 2020 under application number 105-1704.
We would request that any decision would be made be based on that notice of refusal and not the predecessor notice of refusal.
This is an RSA 5 property.
What we're looking to do is to level out the third story.
in the rear and to put three units in this RSA 5 property. I note that there's no dimensional
variances for this property or this request. The only variance we're seeking is the fact that
we're asking to put a three-unit condominium in an RSA 5 property. I will note and I would
you know we were I was here last year at this time or around about for 1317 South 15th Street
And in my Exhibit 3, I included the Notice of Decision granting, under similar circumstances, a variance for a three-unit condominium.
What I also put in Exhibit 3, you'll see is a lay of the land of, like, what other properties within the vicinity of our property.
Is there a way you can share those, Ellen?
Yeah, I'm going to try.
How about this?
I'm going to work with my assistant.
I apologize.
Hey, Nick, can you come in here?
I just – can you send – I need to, like, work on the – I apologize.
This is all new to me, too.
So can you give me the presentation materials, put it in the client file for 1315?
Because I'm not seeing it right now.
So I'm – okay, so which one is it?
Hold on.
Hold on. I apologize, Mr. Chair. I'm going to try to do this as quickly as possible.
Hold on. I'm just, let's see. I'm going to go in Zach's name.
All right. Maybe that's why. Let's see. Hold on.
Okay. Now I do see it. So I think I'm going to be able to share.
Yep. So, I think that's correct. And I think it's that one. Okay. Do you see it now?
It's just your file.
Oops. Do you see what I – you are sharing screen. So, do you see that, like, my table of contents?
you have to open up your file alan i i did so huh let's see you might have to unshare and then
share again inside of the actual document okay um let's see hold on hold on hey nick can you
come in here for a second how do i get out of this thing how do i get out of this thing
all right escape on and i'm gonna get all this document and then i'm gonna hit share
oh i want to open the document first okay there we go
this okay and his share screen this guy
do you see it now yes we do okay all right so let's just go
okay now do you see it
okay good all right so you'll see the deed to the property and then we'll go over exhibit
three that's where i was the notice of refusal and then you'll see that you know of about the
variances that have been granted over the years by this by the ZBA and if you
note you know we're 1325 South 15th Street 1317 South 15th Street which was
granted last year same request a triplex RSA 5 the lot size same exact lot size
our and the building size for 1317 South 15th Street was only 2344 where the
The size of our building would be 2807, so we're a much larger building, so under similarly situated circumstances, this is a more appropriate variance under the circumstances.
The size of our building would be 2807.
So we're a much larger.
I took pictures, just like from the last packet of materials for the previous zoning matter at 1317 South 15th Street.
You'll see the fronts of all these properties.
Again, we're two blocks away from South Broad Street, so from a city planning perspective,
It makes sense to support a commercial corridor with a mix between single-family as well as multifamily properties.
You'll see the notice of decision for 1317 South 15th Street.
It was actually granted on May 8th of 2019.
And you'll see the notice of refusal.
Again, same thing.
You'll see, you know, three units, multifamily, and this board approved it.
You'll also see, as Exhibit 4, my application for appeal with my project information form.
And then you'll see, like, the, you know, Google Maps and zoning maps, which show where the property is located in the vicinity.
And then you'll see photographs of the front of the property.
So my client purchased this property about a year ago.
This is a property that's in pretty rough condition that definitely needs a facelift.
And, you know, part of the reason why we're asking for, you know, relief here is, you know, given the, you know, the amount of work that we're going to need to do to it, plus given, you know, what is around in the neighborhood and what has been approved previously, we believe it makes sense to have it as three condominium units.
So you'll see pictures to the left of the property, to the right of the property, and then you'll see our plans, right?
You see the site plan. You'll see the elevations. You'll see that we're redoing the facade of this building. You'll see the floor plans. A couple things to note. No roof deck. I believe 1317 South 15th Street had a roof deck, while this one doesn't.
The other thing that I would note is that there's no bedrooms in the basement. Each, you know, each floor will have its own unit. And each floor will be two bedrooms, one bath, approximately 950 square feet.
Now, we did meet with the South Broad Street Neighbors Association.
You know, they are in opposition to this matter.
I have a copy of that letter in here.
You know, we can go over it.
But, you know, basically they believe it's an overuse of the property.
You know, we beg to differ in the sense of, again, if, you know, when we presented this to the coordinating RCO,
we indicated that this is a mix between single-family and multi-family they stated otherwise
that this is a single-family neighborhood I did bring up just like I'm bringing up today
all of the evidence of a multi-family you know environment including what this board heard last
year and approved you know they if you look at item three you know again this is a five-bedroom
structure right now what we're doing is putting six bedrooms we're just dividing it into two
uh two bedroom units right they're they're if you look at their letter you know they're stating
that if we have six bedrooms you know we're going to have six plus cars which i don't believe is the
case you know arc you know and again dennis conwell if he was on the line he's the realtor
he you know one of the reasons why we chose this spot was because we're near the broad street line
one of the reasons why we're looking to do condominiums were you know the people that we
would be selling the property to are either single individuals or young couples um especially given
what's going on with you know COVID-19 we see that people are going to like use bikes walk you know
and you know hopefully when things open back up you know they would uh also use the broad street
line. So we disagreed that if you have six bedrooms, you would have six-plus cars, just like
if you have a single family with five bedrooms, you're not going to have five cars. And I know
there's apples to oranges comparison. Now, this is a proof of what we sent the notice to the
surrounding neighbors. I will note one thing, and unfortunately, because of COVID-19,
we don't have the benefit of walking around the neighborhood and doing a petition,
Because typically when we do have some opposition from people in the community who attended the community meeting, we would, you know, see what's going on, you know, see if there's a reasonable solution here or if that was just an outlier.
So when we had 1317 South 15th Street, we actually did a petition.
Again, we're four doors down, and we had a petition circulated, and as you can see, we had a lot of signatures.
Now, this is a different zoning matter.
I just wanted to show because I was unable and my client was unable to circulate a petition.
i just wanted to show because i was unable and my client was unable to circulate a petition
but as you can see there is support in this neighborhood for multi-family use and you know
even though it's a separate property it's the same bones three unit commercial three unit
residential condominium two blocks away from broad street so that's my presentation i understand that
there are people in the neighborhood who are also present so i will defer to them and and ask to
come back for more uh presentation uh counselor counselor yes what is the size of the smallest
bedroom well they're all of equal size so if so right now what is that equals what square feet
so uh it's approximately 950 square feet a bedroom oh the bedrooms the bedrooms um
i believe they're all two bedrooms uh so i i again i don't unfortunately have the architect
here but we do have the floor plans let me go back up there i know they're a little blurry but
i don't have the best eyesight nowadays so um but here they are um it looks like they're uh
they're around 150 square feet some of them like i can't see it it's like 140 like it
they look like they're uh yeah like 140 square feet or so okay thank you you're welcome
question that permit the uh petition you showed on the previous the 1317
15th do we have any way of identifying whether these are homeowners or these are renters um
um i can i no i i don't like we just we take we take petitions based on the occupants but if we
can look at the opa yeah the other thing i just was curious you said we we approved 1317 for three
family dwelling last year that's right that's right and actually my understanding uh is that
one of the people who are going who's going to be speaking today diane mitchell actually supported
this project 1314 South 15th Street so but yes
hello yes okay hold on ma'am any more questions for Alan from the board at
this moment no okay any individuals who wish to speak on it please raise your
hand so we can identify you okay diane mitchell you can speak
miss mitchell i know you were on earlier please identify yourself for the record name and address
the name is diane hamilton mitchell my address is 13 14 south 15 street
I've been living in this block for the past 55 years 56 coming up this Friday because I will be
65 um thank you so much I'm looking forward to this I need to make this very um straight to the
point um we had a petition signed the petition that Alice showed was a petition that was two
I think about two years ago pertaining to the family that lived and I still live at 1317
that house was never mentioned or brought up as turning into or transferring into a condominium
it was always a family unit a family it was never a multi-family it was just one family unit
mother father and a son when it's coming to the property at 1325 we oppose this behind the fact
that for several reasons the the family that lived there are deceased and they've been there
for a long time because um miss evelyn at that particular time was my piano teacher
one thing we opposed to one of the other things we opposed to is that this is going to be a tax
abatement, which Alan did not mention. These units are on the market for $250,000. We have
six families in our neighborhood that's been in this block, two of them have been in this block
over 50 years. And we are on a fixed income. I mean, fixed income that our taxes are going up
if we're under homestead or the loo we cannot afford this tax increase if hoping hoping that
this property does not transfer it into a condominium what they're doing they're going
transferred into a condominium what they're doing they're going to take down the building
to take down the bill
restructure it and we had a problem in our neighborhood of a family that restructures
their house and the walls on both sides of the property 1320 and I think 1322 the walls are
damaged from contractors doing work that they did not have a permit for and never returned
i asked you to just to uh then your testimony related to the request for this property
we are opposing the request for this property to do have a question
we don't we just vote for we just don't want our chairman
outcome of what will happen of no parking increase
Ms. Mitchell, the attorney who represented the applicant shows us a petition that was circulated.
I don't have the date, but it was circulated regarding 1317 South 15th Street.
But our conversation...
Did you sign a letter of support at that time?
according to the petition you supported that that application
if you did that's okay i'm just trying to i want to verify that you signed the petition in support
for the conversion of 1317 from a single family to multi-family
uh chair she was muted um because of over talking you but she can unmute herself and speak now
miss mitchell
yes did you hear my statement my question repeat that again sir i'm sorry
council for the applicant submitted a copy of a petition that was circulated according to council
in support of the property at 1317 South 15th Street.
And that support was to convert a single family to multifamily.
The name of Diane Mitchell, 1314 South 15th Street,
appears on that petition as being in support of that application.
My question is that at that time, did you support that application?
We support it if it was a family dwelling.
This was, we were told that it was a family unit, not a month.
It's a three-family dwelling is what you support.
Three-family dwelling?
No, sir.
We were not told it was a three-family dwelling.
We were told, we were informed by the owners that they wanted to take the first and second
floor they would live on, and their son was just, who was in college right now, would
have the third floor, which is a young adult.
it was not it was not multifamily and I have the petition indicates that it was
all right all right I don't I don't want to belabor the point I just want to
I'm trying to figure out what what why the change of change of heart is right
now okay can I read can I respond to that on chairman 30 seconds please yes
there is no change of heart if that was the case that was misleading the
residents but our main concern was that the 1325 that we do not want we oppose for that being a
condominium and we had no idea if this what we were signing which we were now you're making it
seem like we must we were misled we were not i'm not suggesting that i'm not suggesting that though
sir thank you thank you ma'am thank you okay anyone else to testify
We have a L-T-P-Y-A-T-T.
You're allowed to speak.
You can unmute yourself and present testimony.
Hello?
Good afternoon, ma'am.
Please identify yourself with a record name and address and spell your name for the stenographer.
My name is Latonya.
That's L-A-T-O-N-Y-A.
Last name is Pyatt.
p as in peter y a t t the address is 1326 south 15th street you swear and affirm to tell the
truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth yes thank you please proceed my name is latonya
and my family has lived across the street from 1325 for over 50 something years um we submitted
a letter with about 15 residents on this block who are opposing 1325.
residents on this block who are opposing 1325. As you guys mentioned earlier with Diane Mitchell
there were several of us who signed the petition for 1317 and each of us were we were all approached
by the owners of that property. They informed us that they would be living in the property.
same thing that Ms. Mitchell just said. We were not ever given plans. We were not told
that it was going to be turned into a multifamily dwelling. We were told, same thing that Ms. Mitchell
just said, that the owners would become a part of this community. They would live on the first
and second floors, and they would have another unit for their son. They also informed us that
the building had already been multifamily. It was turned into single family, and they were
turning it back into two apartments, one for them, one for their son. That is the reason why many of
the residents on this block signed that petition, not because we were aware that it was going to be
three condos that is being mentioned today. We are opposed to that. Three condos in 1317. We would
be opposed to condos in 1325. The majority of the homes on this block are still single family.
So we are concerned about the congestion. We are concerned about the parking. And although
the counselor said that he doesn't believe that there would be multiple cars, that of course is
definitely not the case. If you live here and you're not able to park and you have to walk
five blocks to get to your house at midnight, then you would understand why we would be opposed to
this. Thank you. Thank you very much. There are other people who are wanting to talk. I know
there's a Mr. Dunlop who is on the phone. They'll need to raise their hand and Tanya will...
Can someone give him instruction on how to do that? Because he is audio only. He is not on the
tanya tanya miss sunken will give him the information thank you
so if you are a caller as an attendee by telephone then you would have to press star
nine to raise your hand to be recognized to testify going forward chair we have a pamela strowman
Pamela you are allowed to speak you can unmute please identify yourself for the record name
and address and spell your name for the stenographer hi my name is Pamela Stroman
p-a-m-e-l-a-s-t-r-o-m-a-n I am a long-term resident of the Point Breeze community I'm
also the committee person for the 36th Ward 36th division I act as a liaison for the
neighbors on the block of the 1300 block of south 15th street as well as one of the
founding members of our 15th street garden association yes 1325 south 15th in your
political division yes it is thank you you're swearing for him to tell the truth the whole
truth and nothing but the truth yes yes i do please proceed uh several things i'm not going
of belabor the point of what was already said in terms of the opposition, but I myself personally
spoke to, I know them as Jeanette and Andy of 1317 South 15th Street. I was waiting to see plans. At
the time, I had a medical emergency, so I could not attend the zoning meeting. It was, and this
is what was said directly to me that they purchased the house i believe in 2004 um and they
ingratiated themselves into the neighborhood several ways they changed their church membership
to a local church they attended block activities and all intense purposes for many many years they
were single family dwelling and it was only a petition that was going up for their son i had
ask for plans I never received them I did not sign that petition because I didn't have all the
information in front of me and it's my understanding and I could attest to the conversation that they
had with some people they were under the impression that this was just a petition going up for their
son not that it was they were trying to change the entire building and it was going to be rented
out or anything like that but more importantly i think um the opposition is for uh just just
the parking absolutely but there's no hardship for this property um going up as well as you know
they're not doing with the least modifications possible to uh provide relief this is just
regurgitating what SBS and A has stated in their letter.
um have stated in their letter this is a single family dwelling when you look at the persons who
were who are on the petition now as opposed to two or three years ago this as Mr. Allen said
this is apples and oranges because the conversation and the what was put forth in 1317
is very different than what's being put forth now.
We have a developer coming in wanting to, I think,
redo the entire structure, maybe demolish it, I don't know,
and come up with a new structure and make it into condominiums.
Condominiums was never the language of 1317.
Never the language of 1317.
And maybe that's our misunderstanding of the zoning language, multifamily versus condos versus apartments versus single family.
But moving forward, when there was more information presented on 1325 South 15th Street, we opposed it.
We had left less information presented under 1317 South 15th Street.
Thank you for your time.
Thank you for your patience and your testimony.
Anyone else?
Something new and different?
James Simmons, you've been allowed to speak.
You can unmute yourself and give testimony.
Please identify yourself, name and address.
Spell your name for the stenographer.
okay moving forward chair we have arnetta ready arnetta you've been allowed to speak you can
unmute yourself and give testimony miss retta please identify yourself name and address
spell your name for the stenographer. Arnetta Reddy, A-R-N-E-T-T-A, R-E-D-D-Y,
address 1316 South 15th Street, Philadelphia, PA. Thank you. Do you swear and affirm to tell
the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? I'm Muslim, sir, so I will affirm.
Thank you. Please proceed. Something new and different, if it's possible. Thank you.
Yes. My concern is, number one, the number of people that will be allowed to occupy each unit.
What's the intention? What's the number of people that they intend to have occupy each unit?
My other concern is, will pets be allowed in these units?
My next concern is trash removal. Who's going to be responsible for proper trash removal?
Where's the trash going to be stored? We already have rodents in our neighborhood,
so what's going to be the process in which a healthy environment continues for us to exist in?
The other question is, well they talked about parking, so I won't bring that up,
But that's that's those are some of my main concerns. And in a situation where we now have COVID and it's appearing to come up through all of the testimony from the government that is coming up in multifamily dwellings.
and should we have another outbreak as a situation such as COVID? What is the intention on the owners
or the buyers to make certain that this does not come a hotbed for us? We have seniors living in
the neighborhood. We have people on disability. So these are some of my major concerns. Some of my
other concerns are what are the hours and what are the days that construction is going to be
scheduled to take place is it going to take place at six o'clock in the morning and not in until
there are there are city there are guidelines to interrupt you man there are city guidelines as to
when construction be uh could uh when they when construction is allowed i think it's not before
7 a.m but in any event i i do appreciate your testimony if you can summarize we'd appreciate it
so those are those are my major concerns when i moved when i moved into this property it was
because of single-family dwelling understood I've been here over three
decades and talked to new neighbors and the new neighbors that are family
single-family dwellings that's why they told me that they moved into this
neighborhood as well not for multifamily units thank you understood thank you we
We have Anthony Brutiniti. You have been allowed to speak. You can unmute yourself and give testimony.
have Anthony Rutanetti you have been allowed to speak you can
Please identify yourself with a record. Spell your name and address. Spell your name and give us your address, please.
Anthony Brutiniti, B-R-U-T-T-A-N-I-T-I. Address is 1432 South Broad Street. I'm the zoning chairman for South Broad Street Neighborhood Association.
Thank you, Anthony. Do you swear and affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing about the truth?
yes I do thank you please proceed yes we had a zoom meeting regarding this
property we had numerous neighbors that attended the meeting you have heard
their opposition and it was unanimous that none of the neighbors wanted to
have a multifamily dwelling or have this turned into a multifamily dwelling this
property has been used as a single-family for many years decades from
and I understand. And they wanted to keep it as such. The attorney for the owner presented no
hardship of why this property could not remain as a single family and developed as such. And
honestly, we get a lot of cases or several cases from time to time where applicants or developers
purchase a single-family property and want to make it into three-family
dwellings. That's not the spirit of the zoning code. That's not why the zoning
code is the way it is and also the remapping that was done by the Planning
Commission. If a developer wants to make a multi-family dwelling or built
structure, they should be buying RM1 properties, not single-family dwellings
that are RSA-5 and try to turn them into three dwelling units.
That is not what zoning is about.
Zoning is about a hardship and about a hardship of developing the property in the spirit of the code.
So we feel as though they have not presented any hardship of keeping it as a single family.
And they never made any attempt of why they couldn't develop it as such.
So with the resistance from the neighbors in the surrounding houses on the block
and not having a good enough reason of why they purchased the property a year ago
and now want to make it into a multifamily, we're just in opposition of this development.
Anthony, thank you.
What's your title again?
Personally, I'm an architect, but I'm also the zoning chairman for South Broad Street.
A what?
Zoning chairman for South Broad Street.
I have a question.
Were you the zoning chair when 1317 was being considered?
I was.
I've been the zoning chairman for South Broad Street now for about 20 years.
Right.
I'm somewhat familiar with you from my days there.
But I'm just curious, what did the South Broad Street neighbors take on that matter?
I'm not sure about that matter.
I also have to say that our boundaries overlap with Newbold.
Well, now they're with these neighbors.
So they may have heard that case instead of us.
So I don't have a clear recollection of 1317.
Yeah, I just find it unusual that they would have supported that at that time.
I mean, the petition speaks for itself, but I'm just, I don't know if I was around the vote on that or not.
I'm not throwing anybody under the bus.
I just don't recall.
It's kind of out of character.
So, all right.
Appreciate your testimony.
Thank you.
Anyone else who wishes to speak?
We have a caller.
With the last three digits of 051, you can unmute yourself and speak.
And before you begin, please identify yourself, name and address.
and if you can give us something new and different we would appreciate that
caller 051 last three digits do you wish to testify
okay chair that's all okay okay thank you tanya uh mr
lockum sim do any closing remarks yes i do so a couple different things this was actually a
poorly attended community meeting if you look at their uh the coordinating rcos letter summarizing
it, only four nearby neighbors attended. The majority of the people that voted and attended
the meeting were actually part of the RCO boarding committee. So it was not reflective
of the community where if you look at 1317 South 15th Street, which I handled, and if you look at
And if you look at the petition, you know, which clearly states that we're seeking to get a variance for three-family triplex residential dwelling, you saw a year ago, if you look at the notice of decision, the notice of decision, just trying to get it back up here, was 5-8-2019.
the petition, you know, which clearly states that we're seeking to get a variant.
So, Mr. Chair, this board in its current composition, I believe, did vote in support of granting the variance.
And the other thing that I would point out at the last page, too fast, the last page is that Ms. Pyatt actually supported the granting of the variance as well.
If you see her and someone who lives also with Ms. Pyatt.
Yeah, I saw that.
I saw that.
I made reference to that when she testified.
Well, but that was Ms. Mitchell and Ms. Pyatt, so there were two individuals.
Yeah, I understood.
Ms. Mitchell, yeah.
So if you look at a lot of the things they're talking about, they're talking about non-zoning related matters.
They're talking about a tax abatement and how that's going to affect the values of their properties.
But they are talking about other issues, about density.
They're talking about the character of the neighborhood.
it well but again and i agree with you and and as i tell all my clients if you're going to propose
something whether dimensional variance or use variance my test is this if you walk by the
property as proposed like being built or being used a certain way um if it doesn't stick out
like a sore thumb then it makes sense right so that's why i talked about 1317 south 15th street
That's why, you know, we talked about, like, you know, all the other variances that have been granted over the course of time in this area.
This is two blocks away from South Broad Street.
If you look at the numbers, and I'm very into, like, you know, data analytics, you know, we're bigger than what you granted last year for the same use.
And it was, we did propose a condominium.
i do you know uh acknowledge that the owner stated that he was going to live on the first floor or
the the first floor unit i don't put any weight on this comment no i know that but by this one
but he did say that decide to pick up and move anytime they want i know no but i want to
acknowledge that mr chair so i don't know if that changed their uh you know being argumentative
towards you i just i'd never put any weight towards that yeah but but what i do put weight
to is the fact that we have one, two, three, four, five, six structures within a close vicinity of
our property, which are RSA 5, which are now multifamily. So we, I embrace the burden of
proof here. You know, when you look at the neighborhood and the transitional nature of
the neighborhood, that's part of the analysis for undue hardship. Now, I hear that people are
against it. I believe some of it's non-zoning related, but I hear about the density. I grant
that. If the board feels that three units is not appropriate, although it felt it was appropriate
under similar circumstances last year, but if they don't believe it's appropriate under these
circumstances, I ask the board to consider a potential compromise with a proviso not to exceed
two units what what was the purchase price and i couldn't see it was it was purchased
mr chair for 223 000 so especially when you consider covid 19 i know in some people think
the market's great but you know it's a hard market i don't and again i know this doesn't
go into your analysis, Mr. Chair, but like in the board's analysis, but it's going to, it's not
feasible to, you know, it's a different market a year ago from, you know, today. It's not feasible
to sell a five, a five bedroom, you know, single family house there. You know, we're trying to,
we're trying to keep, you know, people active in terms of jobs too. You know, we want to keep the
construction industry going and we think it's a reasonable use you know especially the fact that
we're two blocks away from broad street yeah i hear what you're saying now and i don't i don't
want to get into to a debate with you but i'm familiar with some of the what's going on in the
city currently uh the number of units uh that people are looking to sell far outweighs the
number of units that people are moving into so we got we have a problem as a city not just from
this case we have a problem with the city right now uh in any event anything else before i uh
no uh let me just have my clients uh verify my uh the testimony uh mr
All right, let me just have my client verify the testimony.
Mr. Zach, Mr. Zach, you heard everything I stated today.
Mr. Zach, maybe he's muted.
We'll take it as though he would accept your testimony.
Mr. Zach, you heard everything I stated today?
Yes, I did.
Okay, is it true and correct?
Yes, it is.
And would you adopt it as your own?
i do okay i have two questions questions for the board yes i have two questions uh 13 17
was an addition put on to that one uh no no it was not but we're but at the same time i'm sorry
can i i'm sorry okay the three units do all three units have access to the rear yard uh no but they
did not have that for 1317 either okay thank you any other questions from the board planning
commission uh this property is indicated for a single family residential use on the city plan
believe the applicant has not demonstrated necessary hardship regarding density requirements
of the code it's not consistent with our adopted district plan recommend the request for variance
not be granted. Thank you. Calendar number 39447, 1325 South 15th Street. My vote is no.
My vote is no. My vote is no. Yeah. Thank you very much. Calendar number 39874, 3001 Robbins Street.
I've heard yes good afternoon sir you agree to waive the reason of its refusal and stipulate
on its accuracy yes i do thank you i got cut out there am i still there yes you've been
hold on we're getting a lot of feedback somebody uh
i'd like to share my screen right that's why i had to promote you to a panel
Neil? Yes. Please identify yourself with a record. Spell your name.
Neil Sklaroff, N-E-I-L-S-K-L-A-R-O-F-F. The address is 1500 Market Street, Suite 3500E,
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, 19102. Do you swear and affirm to tell the truth,
the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? Yes, I do. Thank you, Neil. Please proceed.
seem to have difficulty getting on the screen are you seeing my screen no I'm
not sure why, would you hold on please? Can you, am I being, I'm being heard but
not being? That's correct, well we see you now. We do, okay, then let me see if I
can get to please excuse the delay mr. chairman members of the board I have the
pleasure of representing the school district of Philadelphia this afternoon
And with me should be Gamil Hall, the project manager from the school district for this project, and Carlos Tovar, the project architect, and likely Nicole Ward is also available during this conference.
we are here to talk about a significant renovation in addition to the Ethan Allen Elementary School
at 3001 Robbins Street we have submitted two sets of exhibits the one we're looking at and
and the one we're looking at and uh there's an additional one with three pages that are uh
there's an additional one with three pages
copies of what was submitted with the original application we're not seeing that we're not
seeing them if you can share we don't see the plan no the plans i haven't put up yet oh i'm
sorry i can put up the plans whenever we need to but um i think our presentation here will be
significant enough we of course have our tax clearance certificate we have our D
the property was purchased in 1923 it's approximately six acres we have posted
the property twice and the following will be pictures of the posting and our
building and the surrounding community you notice that there's the original and
the second poster. You'll notice there's some trailers in this view, and those trailers
will be removed. Again, posting.
I'm sorry, Mrs. Clareff, are you trying to share your screen?
I thought I was sharing my screen.
No, that's what the chair is saying. He hasn't seen it yet.
All right. Can we, what am I missing?
Go into your click on share screen at the bottom.
I don't have that, but give me a second. I'll have to change the view.
And I do not have anything at the bottom.
You know what, to make this a little bit easier, and I don't know about the rest of the folks,
I have some knowledge of what you're talking about on another matter in
South Philadelphia. So maybe you can summarize it,
basically get to the heart of what this is all about.
I think it's going to be about creating more classroom for the school and
stuff like that.
Absolutely. And I apologize. I thought I was sharing and, uh,
no worries.
I don't have to share.
No problem.
The building is a,
the existing school is a five story building.
uh building uh and we're suggesting proposing to put on a 28 000 square foot addition
that will include a gymnasium 13 classrooms two collaborative rooms as well as restrooms
they'll be put to the rear of the building even though the property is listed technically on
robin street the front of the school faces battersby
there will be significant interior renovation
that will include providing led lighting throughout this is the
existing building upgrading the electrical system
installing the new fire alarm system and security system
all new finishes throughout new casework new cabinetry
staining of the existing wood floors. In the new addition, the first and second floor will
be occupied by the gymnasium. And I'm sorry, I don't have able to show you that how nice that's
going to look and the color pattern that will be throughout the building. On the third and
fourth floors, I'm sorry, on the second floor, there'll be one classroom as along with an
elevator the building is not currently accessible but the elevator will connect
to the existing floors as well as the addition the third and fourth floors are
six classrooms and a collaboration room along with restrooms we have our notice
of refusal refers to the height of the building the height of the building is
51 feet 4 inches to the top of the deck. There's a parapet and stairwell above that. However,
in accordance with the code, they're not included in the measurement of the height.
The existing building is 59 feet. So we think this 51 feet 4 inches is not only necessary to
be able to provide these needed classrooms and gymnasium, but appropriate for the size of the
existing building. The notice of referral was that this is an RSA 5 zoning district which permits
educational use but by special exception. There is nothing extraordinary about what's being added
to the school. It will be used as a school and therefore we meet the requirements of the code
in order to earn a special exception. That's really the nut of it. We did appear in a virtual
in a virtual hearing. We appreciate that the Mayfair Civic Association held that.
hearing. We appreciate that the Mayfair
We sent out 217 invitations to that, and our exhibits include copies of that and the
zoning notice that was included, along with the instructions from
the zoning board and how to participate, which I obviously didn't read well enough.
thank you uh do you need anyone else question key question mr chair is uh is the umbrella
still on the roof boy word travels fast out outside the city oh i was on that's right
no i actually got the fire department to get it off i couldn't do it myself
sorry to interject i'm a little bit scraped up but other than that i'm fine thank you
all right do you need anyone else neil to testify no i don't i i'm testifying on behalf of the
client under 14 303 13 f maybe sharon tell me um so chair i would just like to mention that
any callers who wish to testify you would have to raise your hand by pressing star nine
but at this time chair there are no hands up and there is one now. Okay. Kevin
Haney you've been unmuted and you can go ahead. Please identify yourself with a
record name and address spell your name for the stenographer. My name is Kevin
Haney. Address is 7216 Barnard Street or Barnard Avenue, depending on which map you're looking at.
And I am a member of the Mayfair Civic Association who participated in last Thursday's
RCO meeting. Do you swear and affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
I do. Thank you. Please proceed.
I just wanted to make reference to the recommendation from the Mayfair Civic Association concerning the recommendation for some provisos for sustainable environmental
remediation throughout the school property in addition to the actual work
being done on the expansion and the construction within. I and a number of
others. We might see violence. I believe there's a real need for environmental improvements
at this site. I'm talking about things that would comply with the green schools initiatives
and the green city initiatives and the clean water rain garden program and so forth.
At present, the site of the school is, the school property is 130,000 square feet, virtually
all of that space is covered with either rooftops or asphalt, and now they want the district
understandably needs to expand the property and put up a 50-foot high
structure and this is going to impact people on Battersby Street and
pedestrians and motorists in terms of the visual impact and we think there's
room to improve
that situation.
Thank you.
I just wanted to make sure
written
petition that I filed
yesterday is in the record
and also make note that
I filed a supplement to that petition
today based
upon a landscape plan from the district that I only received this morning, in addition to comments from
In addition to comments from Nicole Ward, I had presented her with a variety of questions
about the landscape plans and what could be done.
and she stated in an email this morning that she could not get back to me
with any kind of substantive response until tomorrow, Wednesday at the earliest.
And I just think that's further reasons that there be some provisos attached to what, frankly, I and others expect will be a zoning board approval.
But we just want to have something that will give the community some level of enforcement, so to speak, with the school district.
And I and others are particularly concerned because, to put it politely,
we've had a number of communication breakdowns with the school district's Office of Capital
Programs going back 10 years, the earliest being with the relocation of the new Lincoln
High School building and outdoor improvements that were discussed then were never done or
budgeted by the district. Mr. Haney, I appreciate your testimony, but could you summarize?
We are running out of time. We're already into our 3.30 session. I will just mention that besides
Lincoln High School. There's also been problems with the new K-8 school, which
almost led to a lawsuit that the school being built now behind Lincoln High
School and also with two aspects of additions at the Mayfair School.
Mr. Haney, would I ask you to just please just address your concerns to this
specific location? I'm just providing that as background for the need. I understand
that. And you said you submitted those provisos? Yes. All right. I'm just
requesting that the board members look at them before any vote on this. Okay.
Understood. Thank you. Any other witnesses?
No, Chair, no one has their hand out. All right. I've not seen those provisos.
Mr. Chairman, I have not seen those provisos. I have not seen a letter from Mayfair Civic as yet.
I was told that it was going to be submitted directly to you notwithstanding that I know of
no environmental suggestions that were made this morning I sent mr. Haney as a courtesy a copy of
the landscape plan if if unfortunately you don't have my PDF to review the property is somewhat
lined with trees or around the perimeter we're for the most part there are six
new trees going on with a new playgrounds going the building will not
on account of the construction violate any environmental rules that we know of
this was not mentioned at the Civic Association Nora this is hitting us
blindsided and we would ask that there be no conditions attached to this approval the school
district is being very responsible in its approach to renovating and adding on to this important
asset to the community counselor let me ask you this are you saying that no phase one environmental
study hasn't been done? It was never asked, I have no idea. Because the building was built
at the time definitely with some environmental problems. If there's environmental difficulties in
If there's environmental difficulties in the building and they need to be rectified, they will.
The school district has a very aggressive policy on that.
I'm also referring to oil tanks in the yard.
I'm sorry?
I'm also referring to oil tanks in the yard.
We don't know of any oil tanks in the yard.
I don't know.
nobody brought that to our attention in during the community meeting if they're
all tanks in the yard and if they need to be removed and that's what pay debt
wants then they'll be removed. Can you still hear me? Mr. Haney has been
heard uh i like the board to vote i got it thank you any other questions from the board no
planning commission while this property is indicated for residential use on the city plan
given the property standing school use including retaining the existing building height
we support the granting of the special accessible thank you calendar number three nine eight seven
four three zero zero one robbins avenue my vote is yes my vote is yes my vote is yes good luck
thank you
that conclude the uh two o'clock list
yes it does yes all right we're going to take a 10 minute break and we'll then begin at four
o'clock we'll begin around four o'clock the 3 30 list does that work for everyone yes yes
you mean uh 3 30 right the 3 30 list i'm sorry if i said something we'll begin the
at four o'clock we'll begin the 3 30 list thank you
okay good afternoon everyone my name is frank d chico i'm the chair of the zoning board of
adjustment we have a quorum i'm officially calling this session to order in attendance
are our board member mr thomas holliman and our board secretary mr confessor plaza in addition
we're joined by tanya sunkett our board administrator and sarin's letter our board
solicitor as you probably are aware today is our fifth day of holding virtual hearings
while we may have to make adjustments along the way our plan is to call each
case and basically proceed as it as we would have in a live hearing we ask that
attorneys for applicants or other interested parties identify themselves
for the record when the case you'll be participating is called we will then
hear the applicants petition followed by any presentation by attorneys
representing other parties interested parties and members of the public not
represented by council will then be given an opportunity to either to testify we will finally
hear the recommendation of the planning commission at the hearing's conclusion the board will either
vote the matter immediately or hold it for discussion in executive session any case held
for discussion will be voted on at the next scheduled meeting august 5th wednesday august
5th 9 30 a.m a couple of changes related to the virtual format first we will be administering
oaths to individual participants to to testify rather than to the room as a whole since we do
not have a room second for the benefit of anyone participating by phone we ask that attorneys and
witnesses identify themselves prior to speaking or testifying third we would like to advise everyone
that this proceeding is being recorded and that by participating you acknowledge your agreement
to be recorded. We would also ask if anyone wishes to testify to please raise your hand
so that Ms. Sunkit can identify you and patch you in to the hearing. I would also ask attorneys
to please please try to limit your testimony to those issues that are necessary for the record
and limit your testimony in entirety for at least for one hour and I don't if I left anything out
someone please correct me Tanya and or Sharon. No I just wanted to mention here if I may
that those who are calling via telephone to raise your hand to give testimony you must press star 9
to raise your hand to give testimony you must press star nine
and that way
and that way you will be able to um be recognized
and go forward and that there also is a phone number
to call in should you um need to put in a parent statement
then we have a phone number that you would call into
and i'll locate it shortly is 267-270-5548 that's the number google line that you call in
and put information on record if you wish to be a party to either case as presented today
thank you chief and if i can make one more announcement the board will begin by reading
a list of cases that are being continued for this session. If you believe that one of these
cases is being continued in error, please raise your hand following the reading of the
list. Thank you. Professor? Yes, sir. Okay, here we go. Continuing cases, it'll be calendar
Calendar number 392-88-128 East Wyoming Avenue is continued.
Calendar number 39125-4609 Head Street is continued.
Calendar number 38450-5506 Baltimore Avenue is continued.
Next case.
any anyone else who wishes to have a case continue any other requests i believe there's one more
um calendar three nine zero nine two sixty eight eighteen shoe avenue okay alan i think alan was
there we have now this is uh we got the tasker street to be heard correct um i have someone
with their hand up though is it DeMarco are you here for your case are you here for a continuance
can you hear me yes I'm here for the case okay so we'll confessor this is the tasker street case
calendar number 39124 1143 tasker street uh Mr. DeMarco you agree to waive the reading of its
refusal and stipulate to attack IRC? Yes, I do. Thank you. Please identify yourself as a sonographer.
Hi, everybody. Richard DeMarco here for the applicant and the owner, Dr. William Zaccone.
My address is 100 South Broad Street, Suite 905, Philadelphia, PA, 19102.
DeMarco, do you swear and affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
yes i do please proceed thank you uh so tanya are you going to allow me to share screen or
should i see be able to see that button or no i'm going to promote you to panelists now
i just i just got promoted all righty i just got promoted okay now all right so just so you know
and thank you for doing doing it in this manner uh chairman and members of the board i appreciate it
my clients appreciate it um this is my first one i'll try to do my best i do have both of
my witnesses in the room with me if that's okay i'll turn the computer to them if i need you to
see them okay thank you and if they testify we'll swear them in thank you all right sounds good so
I won't share my screen with my exhibits just yet. I'll just do a brief statement. I'm going to try
to be very brief with this. I know there's been opposition. So let me give a little bit of
background because the case is a little bit complicated only because of the length of time
that the owner has been, that the structure has been there. So just so we're clear,
there were permits issued to Dr. Saccone for this construction. The issue is, and the issue
before the board, are two dimensional variances. Dr. Saccone, these were vacant properties when
Dr. Saccone purchased it. They were a parking lot in the past. There was a bar there in the past,
and there was all other commercial uses at the property, but there was some surface parking
there when the doctor purchased it and he has sought to construct two single-family twin homes
not twins in the sense that um there's side yards on each side but together two two properties only
only before you there's an extension of the row houses on the north side of tasker exactly exactly
before you there's an extension of the row houses on the north side of tash
and the um uh it's dimensional variances the two of them are rear yard depth
let me try this now i'll try to bring up the refusal on my screen and see if this works
forget just give me a moment i'm going to try to do this
I should have probably tested this okay it's a lot harder than I thought folks
I'm gonna try clicking on it and see if it brings it up do you see documents on
my screen right now? Not yet. How about now? No. No, all right. No. Sorry, Don. I might have to play around with this later. I'm going to, let me ask you this. Do you have the documents accessible? If I can refer to the refusal, are you able to see it in your exhibits? No? All right. Let me try this one more time, folks.
So, Mr. DeMarco, once you hit share screen at the bottom, then click on the document
you wish to share.
Yeah, it didn't pop up, let me see, let me try it again.
It looks like I have to grant access, oh I see, here we go, that didn't work, dang it.
I'm going to try this again.
I don't know.
Sorry, folks.
I'm going to have to play around with that.
Anyway, let me try to do this without.
Sorry about this.
The refusal is simply a rear yard variance.
we're requesting permission to have six foot nine inches and nine
feet are required and it's open space which is the variances the minimum is
25 percent and we're asking for 15.6 percent so these are dimensional
variances the use is permitted these are single-family row homes consistent with
the block. They're minimal relief. The Hertzberg case standards applicable. The burden of proof
is a lesser standard. The issue is that the property has been there and the neighbors are
upset. And look, I understand why they're upset. I wouldn't want to have a property next door that
was unfinished for a long period of time but to be clear the the owner has operated pursuant to
valid permits one of them got revoked and there was a stop work order um we had to go to court
so the point i'm making mr chairman and members of the board the owner is paying the price for
the issues that he's had with different contractors he's had to change contractors
there's been some turnover, there have been some violations, but the zoning is holding up
the completion of the job with L&I. The zoning is the step that L&I keeps citing
as the reason why we can't finish the job. In my exhibit packet, I have engineer's letters
that state that the building is structurally sound, but we're sitting here with the stop work
order, and we're here for the use. We're here for the zoning. We're not here to blame the owner,
punish the owner, and make sure he's never able to finish the job. This zoning, these two minor
dimensional zoning variances are the last step in the process in order to get the building done
from what i understand from the neighbors the objection is not to the relief the objection
is they don't want to reward the developer for his mistakes and you know if we had sought these
You know, if we had sought this relief prior to constructing the frame or the footprint, it would probably not be a difficult case for you.
this relief prior to
construction
But because we have opposition, because there's been mistakes along the road with different contractors, this is why the case is a contested case.
But let's not forget, zoning is about use.
It's not specific to a certain person or conduct or owner.
it's whether the property itself suffers from an unnecessary hardship. I'm going to have my
clients verify some of the statements I've made in a moment but let me say this if we were to not get
the relief the foundation has already been poured. The foundation will have to be cracked open and
we'll have to start over from square one we would have to demolish the existing frame of the
building it would be a catastrophe and everybody has to start over from square
one which would be in nobody's interest so let me just turn my screen to dr.
Zaccone see if this works mr. DeMarco while you're doing that yes I'm familiar
with it obviously so I only live a couple blocks away okay could you just
for the benefit of the other board members and and everyone else uh give us the timeline i remember
when it was a it belonged to senator fumo many years ago when it was a a parking lot your client
purchased the property and when the purchase date when was it 17 16 not 10. oh i'm sorry november of
2010 the doctors answering november 2010. okay and could you tell us again i just want to walk
everybody through the timeline when did construction begin so we have actually obtained a zoning
permit and i'm sorry i can't seem to bring up my exhibits but the first permit was 2014
and september 9th 2014 was a zoning permit for a single family dwelling a building permit was pulled
March 23rd, 2015, for a single-family dwelling.
A second building permit, I guess that was the foundation permit, the permit I just mentioned.
The full building permit was pulled June 7th, 2017, single-family dwelling.
Then I think there was a change in contractors.
There was a break in the action, but another zoning permit was pulled, single-family dwelling, May 2019, and then an easy building permit for the brickwork, 11-27, November 27, 2019.
And in January or February of this year, there were violations and there was a stop work order.
So there's been permits issued by L&I all along the way.
The issue is one of the zoning permits had a footprint that did not include the variance relief.
so the current structure uh did not match the um the plans so the inspector said go get the
variance for the dimensional relief everything's okay but you're too deep and that is why that is
exactly why we're here today a two foot rear yard deviation from the code and an open space area of
about 10 percent um too deep is an understatement i don't mean that sarcastically it's well how does
the property at 11 43 at 41 i would guess how do you get access out in and out i mean there's
seems to be no room from the back of these properties for 1141 to have access out to
out to 12th street 1143 is the corner right corner right i'm sorry 1145 is the corner property
and how does 1143 gain access to 12th street
without crossing over the footprint of 1145.
So, again, I'm just curious.
I just can't see how it works.
Yeah, well, this is the condition.
Well, the condition that you're identifying is consistent with the other homes in the block.
It's the same issue.
There is no alleyway in the rear of...
there is no alley, there's no alleyway in the rear of, of either property.
All right, I'll grant you that, I'll grant you that.
Right, so our properties to our, if you're facing the property,
the properties to the right have the same issue.
This is just, you know, it's because you have a triangular block there.
The homes of the triangular street is, what is that street?
Titan. Oh, Lynn. Lynn Street. Lynn Street. There's a diagonal street. This is where
Paschonk comes in and it creates a lack of ability to have alleyways. So these are conditions
consistent with the rest of the block. I'm going to try to share my screen. It was poorly designed
in my opinion, but that's beside the point. All right. Right. Well, the home itself isn't just a
typical rectangular no i mean but they would have made yard space and they went too far out but
that's it did go too far the structures are up i understand that but but mr chairman keep in mind
the the dimensional variances that we're looking for it's two it's two feet two feet three inches
so i would submit to the board that the depth is a is a de minimis now the open space a little bit
different but if you look at the other properties on the block a lot of these properties have built
out and if i'm sorry i can't seem to get this right but you look at my overhead you look at
the other neighboring properties um they're all built out very few have real rear yards property
i understand that the the board can't see any plan so i'm just trying to and i have a conversation
about how that property does so i have a if i could just i have a mac and i think that's part
of the my laptop is a mac and it doesn't connect me all right let me show you anyway continue don't
worry about that i mean i don't have much else but you can we're not going to be able to see it that
way no okay forget it sorry forget it all right but we need to stand let me put the doctor on to
verify my testimony dr zaccone name and address william's account uh 1208 castor street philadelphia
of Pennsylvania, one night.
Doc, please spell your name for the record.
You can speak loud.
You can take your mask off.
I'm sorry.
Last name is Zaccone, Z-A-C-C-O-N-E.
Thank you.
Do you swear and affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth,
and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Thank you.
Dr. Zaccone, did you hear all the factual testimony I gave
to the board today in my summary?
Is it true and accurate as far as the facts go,
and do you accept it as your testimony?
Does anybody have any questions of the doctor?
Any questions?
All right.
Tanya?
Tanya, anyone else, anyone online to testify?
Yes, we have Tony.
Oh, I have one.
I do have one more person to just to verify one more thing.
Thank you.
Go ahead.
Thank you.
Sorry to interrupt.
I have Mr. Matea here.
Name and address.
Anthony Matea, 2907.
Did you hear my testimony that if we were not to receive the variances, the foundation would have to be,
first of all, are you involved with the construction at the site?
As of now, yes.
As of now.
And if the variances were not to be granted, would you have to actually remove a portion of the foundation
and rebuild the entire house?
Absolutely.
And that would be an extreme cost to Dr. Zucone?
Do you accept the other facts that I mentioned in my summary as true and accurate as far as you know?
Thank you.
Go ahead.
Thank you.
Thank you.
All right, Tanya.
Okay, we have Tony Cho.
You can unmute yourself and speak.
Hi, my name is Tony Cho.
Can you hear me okay?
Yes, and please spell your name for the stenographer, please.
Tony, T-O-N-Y, last name Cho, C-H-O.
I live at 1133 Asker Street, a couple of doors down.
Yeah, Mr. Cho, do you swear and affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Thank you. Please proceed.
I just want to ask, so the neighbors, we submitted a letter quite a while ago from the initial hearing a couple months ago.
I was wondering if the board has received that letter and the materials that went along with it.
Tanya, would you happen to know if there's any letters in the file from the neighbors?
Is that the letter from the passing square or is it letters from just near
neighbors? We collectively put together a letter and had some attachments with a
timeline and a spreadsheet of the current open violations on the property. Thank
you. No, I wouldn't. Where was it submitted?
No, I wouldn't. Where was it submitted?
This was submitted before the last continuance, which, forgive me, I don't remember, it was
like February or so, I guess I want to say, March, right before everything shut down?
Oh, so no, we wouldn't have copies or anything from the hard copy, fine.
Okay. Is there an ability for me to share my screen?
Yes, it's okay. Yes.
I think this is actually
Mr. DeMarco's screen
Okay, great
Let me just
Can you see my screen?
Yes, Mr. Cho
Can you just back away from your mic a little bit?
Sure, I'm sorry about that
Can you see my screen now?
We have your screen
Okay, so this is one of the attachments that
We submitted along with the letter
I'm not going to show you the letter
Because you're not going to read it through on your screen
but you know this is a little bit of a history of the properties both at 1143 and 1145 as you can
see this goes back to 2014 um and obviously um mr chairman you said you live near the property you
know exactly what it looks like you know the conditions of the properties as it's been sitting
around um has been horrific so you can see the trash uh located here um the trash and the fencing
that continues to pile up against it you know this is what you know we the neighbors have been
putting out with for for many many years um let me just scroll down back here if you see this
picture down here at the bottom may 2018 you're talking about you're trying to get sense of what
the the backyard uh looks like that's the combination of two of them um you know that's
the the debris and the trash that's been going back there and obviously you can see there is
no open space there is no ability for the the property on the further end to have access out
um you had mentioned that all the properties on the north side of tasker street that we do not
have access we actually have an easement i'm at 1133 there is an easement that goes across
and there's an alleyway that all of us can access so there is an outdoor access that we
on the north side of the property can get to except for obviously these two properties so i
just want to clarify that because you were talking about that a moment ago um you know through here
august 2018 the fencing has been you know the weeds as you can see uh you know we have i have
you know i have now have three kids but you know i have an older kid who's seven we had lots of
kids on the block cracked concrete it's just you know shopping carts littered it's just a dangerous
scenario um this is actually the siding picture for here for march 2019 exactly looks exactly
the same right now i mean there is siding peeling off of this thing that flies into our properties
uh especially marines next door um which is dangerous you know it sits there it flaps in
the wind anytime there's a bad windstorm more goes flying off um again dangerous trash open
rusted nails you can see off the wood um and last summer uh i guess the applicant uh appealed again
for a variance um you know there were scheduled eba hearings they were cancelled there were there
was public notes for one of them but afterwards there was no public notes for any of the other
ones um i uh mr demarco noted that there was uh i guess a permit granted for exterior masonry work
um which was then revoked i believe december or january i think that was for like the minimal
work at the bottom of the property they weren't supposed i'm guessing they weren't supposed to
go above that but then they continue on with the brickwork and probably that's why it was revoked
if you look at the permit it says minor alterations which to me a whole brick facade
of a building or two buildings is not a minor alteration again I don't mean to interrupt I
know what you and the neighbors have been going through as I said I I'm very familiar with this
property in fact I received calls at my home from some of your neighbors asking me as the
former council person if there was anything i can do to get the property cited and right
the matter cleaned up so again i i don't want to dismiss your testimony uh i guess the bottom line
I guess the bottom line is we are where we are today.
is we are where we are today with the board
The board is going to be asked to make a decision.
I don't know what the timeline is.
We'll have to speak to the owner and the contractor.
What are the next steps in getting this property secured and completed?
Right.
So I have two points to that matter.
Let me share one other screen right here, if I may.
Do you see a spreadsheet right now that says Exhibit E?
So I haven't updated this since the pandemic shut everything down.
This was my tally of all the open violations currently on 1143 Tasker Street.
As you can note here that many of them are still open,
and many of them are deemed a hazard.
So, you know, there's continuing ongoing work at the property.
um we don't you know there's they've been working to stop work orders i don't know what they're
doing i don't know what they're drywalling over the neighbors don't know they have existing
electrical hazards code violations you know we want this fixed we want to make sure we know we
don't want to see this you know sitting there looking ugly like that we want it to be fixed
we want it to be repaired we want it to be done the right way i think part of if you if if the
border proves this you lose the city loses any sort of leverage to get them to repair
these permits uh these these violations um you know the city loses any leverage so i'm not i'm
not sure of that because there will be inspections and there will have to be a certification
after everything's drywalled up and over all these electrical issues i mean they shouldn't
be working on them they should get them this fixed and then work on them what i want to see
uh close what that's what we're going to be at we're going to ask the contractor what are the
next steps to address all these open violations um and obviously the l and i will have to be
paying a lot more attention uh to the development as it continues as it goes forward right okay i
I mean, that was one main point is to make sure that these are addressed.
And I want to make sure that the city does not lose any sort of point by granting approval to this in getting the applicants to address these hazards.
The other point, and speaking to the actual variance and the sizing of the property, as you can see, there's trash shooting about.
There's building materials all over the sidewalk.
Part of that is because they don't have enough open space on the property itself to store any of that or to have any sort of dumpster or trash in it.
The exact design, what they've built, has forced them to put all their trash on the sidewalk.
So the precedent that would be set by the ZBA, by approving this and saying, oh, it's okay, it's fine, you did this.
I mean, they've constructed this so that they're forced to put that trash on the sidewalk.
It's not just that it's neglect.
It's they have to do it because of the design.
Mr. Cho, I agree with you wholeheartedly.
Wholeheartedly.
What is the alternative?
Tear these buildings down or let him complete it and hopefully we get, not hopefully, that we get L&I to stay on top of this project because they're very familiar with it to make sure that the developer slash contractor address all these issues.
I mean, there's no other alternative.
I understand that.
I mean, I don't think any of us think that, you know,
expect that it'll be torn down and restarted.
So that's all.
And I appreciate I'm not trying to cut you short.
We get it.
I mean, I get it.
And I'm sure the rest of the board gets it by now,
is that we've got a situation.
It's a horrible situation that was put on the residents of that block
for many years.
I sympathize with it.
I've seen it.
I don't live.
I live a few blocks away.
but this is we have an issue to deal with today and hopefully the board makes whatever recommendation
we make we'll get this project up and running in in the truest sense of the word to get it
completed and completed uh to meet all of the standards of the building building standards
and we will not we will put in a cut we will put in a proviso that they must get a certificate
within a certain amount of time that will force the issue on getting these uh violations cleared
up i would just ask that the violations are cleared before the zba approves it that's
my recommendation but thank you for letting me uh things letting me testify and share
thank you appreciate your testimony thank you may i respond now mr chairman
so a lot of incorrect statements were made by mr cho and again i and i i heard what you said
mr chairman from a legal standpoint let me make make this clear the violations don't just disappear
Let me make make this clear. The violations don't just disappear because you grant the zoning variance
because you
The violations we're in court. We're in court with this. Okay, so first of all
there's no precedent set other than
You would grant these minor dimensional variances that we're looking for. There's no legal precedent at all and
We still have to deal with L&I
with all of the open violations if you grant the variance we've still got to comply
the building code issues so you know the community you know and listen they're they're
my neighbors too i live there i grew up there in that area um if you're going to basically if what
the community is saying don't give them the zoning and that way nothing will get done it does not
make sense with all due respect we're trying to fix the problem the zoning is the first piece
it's a mess and i'm sorry and the doctor's sorry that it was um it was poorly handled there were
mistakes made uh but the building is intact it's structurally sound um they're under a stop work
order so they can't do any cleaning without getting arrested there's a stop work order in
place so nothing can happen well i think you could clean up the sidewalk without covering it
back getting i'm sure we could clear up the sidewalk yes that i that i can guarantee you
they did do that okay if you clear the violations and then get the stop work order taken away
that's fine and then get the get the zba to approve that's that's fine you're not why
listen listen listen listen opposition hello hello hello hello hello you if you guys want to have a
off the record conversation i encourage you to do that but let's get back to the issue in front of
us please and richard yeah it's pure frustration on the behalf of the people who've lived there
for 10 12 years with this horrible situation right that they shouldn't have to live with
i know i agree i agree right i agree but the doctor has to a doctor has to take responsibility
as well yes and believe me uh his office is only across his office is only across the street yeah
um he was fined i don't know if i want to get into the well i'm just but it's on appeal mr
chairman he has suffered a serious almost a catastrophic fine that i took understood yeah
so it's not like there hasn't been enforcement and there's not going to be enforcement members
of the board to know, he's paying the price in a big way. And once we get the zoning straightened
out, he's got a whole nother process. Understood. So that's all. I would move my
exhibits into evidence. I'm sorry. I've got to figure out how to do this and how to share my
screen. All this was submitted to the board on Thursday. All the building permits, my engineer's
letters, the overheads. Yeah, it's a little deep, but just to address one of the issues,
Mr. Cho said there is an alleyway.
It is blocked by our immediate neighbor.
There's a cinder block wall.
So we couldn't even connect to that easement
even if we wanted to create an easement,
which technically we still could do,
but it would be useless
because it doesn't go through that particular property.
Understood. Thank you.
Tommy, do we have any other witnesses?
Yes. Suzanne Tavani,
you can unmute yourself
and begin your time thank you very much please identify yourself spell your name for the
stenographer suzanne s-u-z-a-n-n-e tavani t-a-v-a-n-i i chair the zoning committee for the
passion for civic association which is the rco in this matter and be swearing if i'm to tell
the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth i do thank you please proceed thank you
mr chairman um i'm not going to recount everything that everyone has recounted and mr chairman i
understand that you are very familiar with this property and you gave us a lot of time when we
appeared before you in march uh at the continuation and our frustration is is one that is obviously
shared with the neighbors. The issue is, is that Dr. Zaccone, on many occasions in the past few
years, was invited by the Patrick Square Civic Association to appear and to present to the
neighbors, if anything, as a minimal show of goodwill and respect for the neighbors. And the
neighbors didn't even get that much. There are many violations for this property. There is a
total lack of goodwill. And when we had our zoning meeting back in March, which was the last one
before we were shut down, we actually asked questions and Mr. DeMarco was there so he
we actually asked questions, and Mr. DeMarco was there, so he knows this. We actually asked
understand.
questions of, I guess, the project manager who was there. We asked him some basic questions like,
who's the contractor? And everybody kind of looked around the room like, oh, we don't know.
And now today we have Mr. Matea who was saying that he's the contractor. So this has been a
project that has been fraught with comings and goings, and nobody knows who's on first,
and it's just a really, really bad Abbott and Costello trick, and it's got to be stopped.
So it sounds like you are going to grant the variance, but there has got to be some serious
provisos that go along with this, because this has been 10 years of nightmares for those neighbors,
and they don't deserve it. So that's what I have to say. I'm not going to bore you anymore with
what you already know. Thank you very much for your time. Thank you, Ms. Devonnie. Thank you.
Thank you. We have Barry. You can unmute yourself and speak. Thank you. Can you hear me? Yes.
Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman and the panel and everybody else. I'll let go what Tony and Ms.
Devonnie said. The only thing I want to add is, I mean, we're kind of damned if we- I'm sorry,
Barry?
Mr. Chair, could you please swear him in?
Chair, can you unmute yourself?
Thank you.
Mr. Castle, do you swear and affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
And did you spell your name for the stenographer, please?
B-A-R-R-Y-K-A-S-S-E-L.
Thank you.
Please proceed.
And I echo what Mr. Chow and Ms. Tavani said.
I just want to add, you know, this situation has put us in a situation where we're damned if we do and damned if we don't.
If we don't oppose, they'll appeal, and this thing sits for another God knows how long.
If we do, you know, if we, you know, fall, if we don't oppose, you know, look at the place, Mr. DiCicco.
You know what it looks like.
there's no confidence in some poor unsuspecting buyer where buyers are going to buy this place
after it's been out there like this in terms of Mr. DeMarco you know what Mr. DeMarco I kind of
agree to a certain extent if if early on the doctor went around and said look this is what
I want to do I may need a variance I don't think there's anybody on this block that would have
denied it. You know, that may be, but I know these people. We're friends. I mean, we want
this kind of stuff in this neighborhood. But like Ms. Devonnie said, this has been a shell game
from day one, you know, and in terms of interest, you know, our interest is obvious. You know,
it's almost like it's being rewarded. And Mr. DeMarco said, all this is predicated on a mistake.
it ain't a mistake a lot of this was done to cut corners and and and do things you know the cheap
way or the fast way I mean look at the place my grandsons could build a better place with tinker
toys and and you know I've spoken to Mr. DiMatteo or Matt Mattia these guys are nice guys but as
Mr. Vani said I mean who knows what's going on but it is I I feel I feel at a loss because we're
damned if we do and damned if we don't. Nobody wants to see that place torn down because then
we're starting again. But you're right, Mr. DeMarco. If this thing had started from the
beginning the way it should have been, and you know what? The doctor had probably 10,000 chances
to do this in the last six years, and it wasn't done. So that's where we're coming from. You're
right is it a big variance no not really it's the principle of the thing and it's the thumb and the
nose at the law you know somebody asked me to do i obey the law i imagine you obey the law
the board obeys the law but throughout this whole thing we saw nothing but thumb in your
noses at the law so may i that is that is not an exaggeration i understand and that we have
mr barry a question sure yes uh didn't mr matea clean the sidewalk when you asked him to
actually we we had been asking for a while and it was clean i mean and you know truth be told and to
be completely transparent the property now doesn't look exactly like those pictures it's a little
cleaner but you know what the sidewalk's still blocked that you know there's still scaffolding
and all that stuff and you know that there's a stop work order well but
there's wait mr. DeMarco I get it and you know what it's right it's like a
it's right it's like a catch-22 but you know what there have been people see there's such bad fate
catch-22 but you know what there have been people see
there's been people there working notwithstanding the stop order but then the police are called so
then they stop yeah so it's this tension you know that nothing gets done simply because nobody's
done the right thing i understand even now mr demarco you know the doctor could knock on doors
You can knock on doors and say, hey, everybody, I'm sorry.
This is what I'm trying to do.
Right.
But I think what – forgive me for trying to say what you're saying, Mr. Castle,
but there's some common ground here, I think, which is that everybody wants to get it solved, right?
Right.
And, you know, I'll address the board at this point.
I appreciate your testimony.
I'm not going to cross-examine you.
I think you were somewhat fair.
i don't think that the doctor though is is i mean he's responsible only to the extent that he has
hired people that have not served him well but the owner himself isn't the one making the mistakes
and the prop the relief that we're looking for addressing the board now mr chairman and you
know the neighbors are not uh they make a good point but again mr morgan as far as the owner
If I fell down on the property, I don't go just after Mario, right?
I go after Zaccone.
So at the end of the day, the doctor's responsible.
I said that.
I agree.
Mr. Castle, I made that clear earlier.
He's got a lot of responsibility here.
Not only that.
He may have picked the wrong contractor or contractors, but as a common decency to the rest of the community, he should have been at least having conversations during that time.
So let's move on from that if we could, Mr. DeMarco.
And just one more thing, Mr. DeMarco, you're right.
I think we all want this solved, but we all want it solved the right way,
and hopefully the doctor and Mr. Matteo do too.
So I would just say this, and thank you, Mr. Castle, for a fair testimony.
Mr. Chairman, I would say this.
This is only the first step that gets us to the point where we can fix the problem.
We have to get this in order to move on to the building permit and getting the other violations to comply.
L&I is saying we're not doing anything until you get your zoning straightened out, and that's where we are.
So I'd ask the board, and I'd even ask the neighbors, we've got to look at the big picture.
The doctor's being punished for his choices already.
we've got a major fine or in court there's nothing that is stopping that
part of the process to to be enforced but we need this relief to get this
rolling and to get to the other items here we have a Richard Johnson you've
been allowed to speak you can unmute yourself and give your testimony mr.
Johnson please identify yourself name and address for the record yes hi this is
richard johnson address 1134 tasker street and mr johnson do you swear and affirm to tell the
truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth i do and i would ask if you could to uh your
testimony limited to something new and different please yes mr chairman and thank you um i'll try
to do that uh i would just add that um in regards to the uh the sentiment that l and i will be on
top of this um i just would like to say that the confidence in that if we grant this variance um
is somewhat low um l and i i actually talked with one of their uh people who was outside of the
property, not to inspect it, but just happen to be there, they're overwhelmed as it is.
If L&I was able to be on top of this property, we wouldn't have to call 911 when work continues
to be done on this property. As recently as the last two weeks, they've attempted numerous times
to continue work on this property despite the stop work orders despite the community opposition
despite not having any approval of for their violations um so you know i i don't i don't know
what is the strongest lever to pull to hold them accountable moving forward but you'll excuse me if
i i in that i i'm not i'm ignorant of what those would be um because to the to date um you have
there uh you have mr de marco saying that moving forward this will be fine as recently as the last
two weeks they have still attempted to work on this property so what good will
they have still attempted to work on this property so what good will are you harboring now
to address these issues um i would also like to say i'm not a um in our letter which was
signed by 80 percent of residents on the block uh we put in a list of requests one of which was to
get an engineer into that space and deem it structurally sound. Now, Mr. DeMarco says he
has something to that effect. That would be very important to me before granting a variance for
this property because I have a reason. I mean, you've seen, Mr. Chairman, you've seen this
property and how it's been exposed to the elements for six years. How confident are we? They're not
going to have to tear this property down in the end regardless. So before we go ahead and grant
variances, why don't we address some of the community concerns, get a third-party engineer
in there, something to the effect where we all feel that this property is even safe. Because
in my mind, it's a disgrace. It's not only a disgrace, but it looks like it could fall down
and I wouldn't wish my worst enemy in there.
Well, it sounds like, Mr. DeMarco,
there's a request being made to get an engineer study on this property.
So we have two exhibits.
We have two letters in our exhibits.
One is a letter from Earl Busser, professional engineer.
I'm going to read it in the record because I keep trying to share my screen.
it's not working i apologize but anyway i'm going to read into the record mr booster is a professional
engineer he says do us a favor please spell his name for the record earl f buser b-u-s-e-r-p-e
this is exhibit seven of my submission to the board uh it says it's to the department of
licenses and inspections it's a business record it was submitted at the request of l and i
it said dear plan examiner on the above address property representing 1143 and 1145 tasker street
i was out there prior to them pulling the permit for the brick veneer the contractor listed above
asked for my opinion on the zip board that was applied to the side and front of 1143 and 1145
tasker the structurally and structural integrity and condition of the zip board was good i had
instructed him that he would be able to go ahead and apply the tie-ins to carry
the four-inch brick veneer that was called to sum up in my professional
opinion the zip board was structurally sound for the brick veneer to be applied
and it's stamped and sealed which means that he can be sued if it's not done
right there's a second letter in my submissions exhibit 8 which is alpha
engineering inc i would like to read into the record concerning 1143 and 45 tasker street
this is george baluz b-a-l-l-o-u-z professional engineer it's also stamped and sealed to whom
may concern to dr william zaccone this is to certify oh i'm sorry this is dated june of 2019
this is to certify that we have evaluated the foundation works for the above mentioned project
and the status of the project site we can certify that the works were done according to what was
called and the project is structurally sound and safe no further action is required from a
structure point of view the work can continue once permits and papers are valid so we have a letter
dated um last year and last fall that the zip board and its foundations are structurally sound
um and at that point we got to stop work order so you submit copies of those to the
pass on square neighbor association folks no they were submitted to the board i'm asking if
you would send it to them oh yeah absolutely i can email it to her right now email it to
suzanne or wherever thank you i'll send my whole exhibit packet to suzanne tavani thank you
All right. Any other witnesses, Tanya?
No, no new hands.
Thank you.
Richard, you conclude?
Yeah, I move my exhibits into evidence.
I'll share these engineers' letter with Ms. Devani.
I'll do it right after the conclusion of this hearing.
I'll email my whole...
Sure. I'll email my entire packet over.
Again, this is a Hertzberg case.
case, the dimensional variances are reasonable in pursuit of a permitted use, which is single
family residential. The property has been vacant, has been commercial, has been a bar,
it's been parking. The underlying zoning calls for a single family home.
it's been parking the underlying zoning calls for a single family home uh it's a little large but
they are minimal dimensional variances that are requested it would be necessary to get the
variance in order to allow lni to allow us to address the structural and building code violations
there's a court enforcement matter so the uh the doctor is already dealing with enforcement so
So we'd ask you to grant what is underlying just reasonable dimensional relief in pursuit
of a permitted use.
So I'll move my evidence into the record and thank you to the board for its time.
Just give me a minute, Richard.
Thank you.
sorry about that uh questions from the board no planning commission this property is indicated
for single family residential use on the city plan i believe the applicant has not demonstrated
necessary hardship regarding the dimensional requirements of the code recommend the request
for variance not be granted thank you ron uh i'm inclined to agree with you but unfortunately
i i think if we deny this we're going to wind up in in a bigger hole than we're already in no pun
intended uh i just hope that this your client mr demarco and his contractor behave in a better
in a better manner than they have for the last 10 or 12 years.
And as far as I'm concerned, I'm no longer the councilman,
but I would suggest that you folks continually call
Councilman Squilla's office if you have any continuing issues
with the way this project has been going.
Thank you.
And with that, I will say calendar number 39124,
1143 Tasker Street.
My vote is yes.
my vote is yes my vote is yes good luck
i thank you and uh believe me we'll we'll be working with l and i very uh closely the rest
of the way i hope so richard thank you absolutely and i'm on appeal so look we're gonna we have a
whole process thank you so chairman does that conclude or we got one more uh thing that was
it right for the i think that concludes the 330 list am i correct yes um i believe it is but i
believe there's someone here mr knockinson wanted to question the continuance of the
chew avenue appeal thank you still here i don't see him anymore okay
did you want to speak to your continuance no i think he left
okay uh take a five minute break then we'll get into the four o'clock session
Yes. Thank you.
Sharon? I'm here. I'm here.
Anya? I'm here.
We're all here again. Okay.
good afternoon everyone my name is frank de chico i'm the chair of the zoning board of adjustment
we have a quorum i'm officially calling this session to order in attendance is our secretary
miss mr confessor plaza and our board member mr thomas holliman in addition we have our city
solicitor miss sharon saletta and our board administrator miss tanya sunken as you know
today as as you may be aware today is our fifth day of holding virtual hearings while we may have
to make some adjustments along the way our plan is to call each case and basically proceed as we
would have in a live hearing we ask that the attorneys for the applicants or other interested
parties identify themselves for the record when the case is called you'll be when the case you'll
be participating is called we will then hear the appellant's presentation followed by any
presentation by attorneys representing other parties, interested parties and
interested parties and members of the public not represented by council will
members of the public not represented by counsel.
then be given an opportunity to testify we will finally hear the recommendation
of the Planning Commission at the hearing is conclusion the board will
either vote the matter immediately or hold it for discussion in executive
session any case held for discussion will be voted on at the next scheduled
meeting on August the 5th at 9 30 a.m. August the 5th at 9 30 a.m. A couple of changes related to
the virtual format. First, we will be administering oaths to individuals prior to their testimony
rather than to the room as a whole since we do not have a room. Second, for the benefit of anyone
participating by phone, we ask that attorneys and witnesses identify themselves prior to speaking
or testifying. Third, we like to advise everyone that this proceeding is being recorded
and that by participating, you acknowledge your agreement to be recorded. We would ask that if
anyone wishes to testify at the time of the hearing that you're interested in, to please
raise your hand so that Ms. Sunken can recognize you and pat you into the to the hearing. I would
also ask the attorneys to please limit your testimony to those issues that are not are
extremely necessary for the record and we ask that you limit your testimony to one hour.
I think we're ready to go with Mr. Quaza please begin. Okay these are continuing cases calendar
number 38151, 5405 Christian Street. Also calendar number 38156, 5627-41, Hegerman Street.
We're ready to roll? Are there any further requests for continuances? If so, please raise
your hand okay did I leave anything out Sharon and or Tanya the only thing we
would ask if you're a participant by telephone in order to give testimony you
must raise your hand by pressing star 9 on your phone to be granted the
opportunity to speak and then if you are calling in by phone and you wish to
be put as a party to the case or whatever case is heard today, then we have a Google
voice phone number that you can utilize to call and you would put your information on
record. The number is 267-270-5548. Thank you, Chair.
Thank you, Tanya, and no other requests for continuances? Okay.
I have hands up and I'm unsure. Yes, if somebody feels that one of these cases
was read in error, please raise your hand and speak up. Mr. DeMarco,
you going to unmute yourself? You're here for something? Yes, I have two questions. One,
do I need to leave the Zoom and re-enter and register since I was on the immediately preceding
case? And I did not have a chance to register specifically for this case because it would
have had the wrong information. But I'm involved in the 2000 Spring Garden case on behalf of a
protestant. So I did not have an opportunity to register. Do I have to leave the Zoom and
then re-register, or can I do that later? Are you an attorney representing someone for this
case? Yes. No, you can just stay as you are and we'll promote you as a panelist, but you can also
use that Zoom number if you wish to, I'm sorry, that Google number if you wish to put yourself
on record. I understand some of the addresses or cases wasn't listed. We apologize as we work
through some of our challenges but um you can stay on and when necessary we will promote you
to a panelist thank you and then i do have a comment on a continuous request for this case
but i'll wait until you're ready for that okay thank you i also see a call-in person who has
the hand up i'm going to allow them to speak call-in user three is what it's labeled um are you
We're here to testify about a continuance.
The person on the phone, label call-in user three.
The person on the phone labeled call-in user 3.
Hello?
Are you an interested party in this case, or do you have concern about the request for
continuance?
Call-in user, unmute yourself, please.
Unmute yourself, ma'am.
Core number, user number three, you have to unmute yourself. Unmute yourself, please.
Okay, thank you.
Can you name and address?
Yes, it's Adrienne Fernandez, Swampoodle Neighborhood Possibles Association, RCO.
Ms. Fernandez, do you swear and affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
yes thank you I'm registering I was able to do it on on the film five times it
wouldn't accept it for 2964 North 23rd Street the attorney slash applicant said
he was continuing but it's still on the list are you here for a continuance for
today? No, I'm not. The attorney said he was, he sent an email saying he's asking to reschedule,
but we requested to be dismissed because it was already continued. I'm willing to wait until it
comes up for testimony, but I was just confused. I didn't know if he contacted ZBA separately
because he indicated that immediately he contacted ZBA to not have the hearing today.
okay you can probably follow up with the board i'm not sure what um case this is but we only
are we are only here discussing the last case 2000 spring garden street oh you're saying for 430
you do not have on the list 2964 north 23rd street
Sharon, could you explain that to Adrienne, please?
Swampoodle's request in a case be dismissed.
Okay, we can discuss that offline.
Thank you.
Okay, I'm just confused, am I waiting for that address to come up, is it showing up on
the Zoom list?
Are you telling me it's not on your list?
No, it's not.
Do you want me to wait till you call?
What do you want me to do?
Do you want me to wait till you call it?
We'll talk to you offline.
It's not listed for today on this list.
We have one case left.
Okay, because there's four listed on the Zoom.
I don't know if you're aware of that.
There's four listed for 430 on the Zoom.
Yeah, she's out.
There's a technical issue.
I think you want to, you, Swampoodle was asking for the case to be dismissed.
I believe there's an also for another request to have the case continued it's being continued
because we did not receive the exhibit so it can't go forward this is 29 54 we are discussing there
there's one case listed that is going forward at 4 30 there are three that are being continued
continued that one of the three that's being continued is the case that you're interested in
adrian and at the time of the hearing then you can make you can move to you can ask that the
case be dismissed thank you calendar number uh 398 37 2000 spring garden street
we can hear you good afternoon we can't hear you sir can you speak up a little louder
Good afternoon. Can you hear me now?
So, Mr. Miller, can you check and see if your volume is up on your device?
Okay let's do a sound check test test test all right hold on yeah hold on yeah hold on sir yeah explain
all right hold on yeah hold on yeah hold on sir yeah explain
i'm sorry i understand there are two other attorneys on this case
and that those attorneys are requesting a continuance is that correct yes it is mr chairman
can i be heard now on that yes yes please i'll be very brief uh
because Mr. DeMarco just identify yourself you've already been sworn it and I'll be very brief
because I did submit a letter and the reasons for the continuance were contained in that letter
that was my letter dated July the 23rd 2020 the board hasn't officially ruled on it we did ask
for a special listing of this case that was one of the one of the main reasons for the continuance
request. There are multiple witnesses. There are multiple attorneys. There are experts,
multiple experts. So we thought starting late in the day at this time, which is now 519, would be
difficult. And we suggested a special listing. Sharon did let us know that there wasn't really
room for that but there were other items i would just like to highlight which was that
the rco process was basically contained within about a two-week period we found out about this
hearing date about 15 days ago the rco has labored valiantly to try to complete its process
uh through an email comment format um there has never been an in-person rco meeting due to
the issues with the covet 19 shutdown um we um we did want to have an in-person meeting
but we understand that's not possible we were hoping that there would be some sort of zoom
platform neighborhood meeting in this case that never took place and the only
mailed notices that went out by the applicant as the applicant is required to
do were sent for the meeting that was ultimately canceled in March due to the
COVID-19 shutdown so we've never had a in-person or zoom meeting there's been
no time and prior to this hearing there was no opportunity other than email comments for near
neighbors to submit comments now the rco has been able to conduct a process and obviously we've
participated in that process but i wanted to put on the record mr chairman and and the board has
not ruled on my request that this matter be continued to allow for more time for community
input and for mailed notices by the applicant as required for this hearing and i'll rely otherwise
on my letter that was sent last week thank you for your time thank you i have another attorney
i believe who wishes to speak in reference to this ryan boland yes good evening members of
the board um ryan boland and i'm here i represent spring garden civic association we joined in mr
demarco's request mr boland mr boland please spell your name identify yourself with the record name
and address certainly ryan boland r-y-a-n-b-o-l-a-n-d my address is 1801 market street suite 2300
philadelphia pennsylvania and i represent sorry go ahead you swear and affirm to tell the truth
the whole truth and nothing but the truth? Yes, I do. Thank you. Please proceed.
So again, I represent the RCO, the coordinating RCO. We joined in the request of Mr. DeMarco.
We understand that the applicant, although the applicant agreed to try and have a remote session
where comments were submitted to the RCO and then we prepared a letter, we understand there's
some concerns about that. We are very happy to host a Zoom meeting, have formal notices set out.
We're happy to do anything that any party wants here. We've tried very hard, as Mr. DeMarco said,
in order to collect feedback. That's all I have. Thank you. Here I have Janice Woodcock,
who would like to speak janice you've been allowed to speak you can unmute yourself
can identify yourself janice name and address and then i'll swear you in please
where do i
Where do I, how do I raise my hand?
Hello, this is Andrew Miller speaking.
Well, I think we were waiting for Ms. Woodcock.
And then we'll get to you, Mr. Miller.
Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
Janice, you can unmute yourself.
Hello, this is Janice Woodcock. I'm at 2047 Rittenhouse Square. I do not need to be sworn
in or speak today if the case is continued. I was only in the chat to make sure that I
was able to be heard as a witness should that be necessary. I'm just unfamiliar with the
procedures I apologize no worries thank you Mr. Chairman Janice is our one of our witnesses
and was just being formal understood understood I also yeah Tanya I also have Joseph Beller
I don't know if that's Ryan or someone no I just I'm here with Ryan Ryan will be conducting
can you hear me okay we hear you joe okay i'm glad you hear me uh ryan will ryan bolland will
be representing and i'm just there with him thank you uh also for the record i understand a letter
was sent in today from council president clark's office asking for a continuance also is there
anyone else tanya yes beside you mr miller i mean is there anyone else thank you on the
continue on the continuance request i see megan b i don't know if she's here for
megan you can speak are you here for the continuance request
hi um no i'm i'm here to support uh the development okay
okay and anyone else uh that's all i see chair thank you mr miller
good afternoon may it please the board my name is andrew miller and i represent the applicant
the suggestion that mr demarco has made that the spring garden civic association or the community
committee in general has not had sufficient time to consider this application is untrue.
This process began with the Historical Commission over a year ago.
The plans before you are the same plans that were before the Historical Commission.
Those plans have been in the possession of Mr. DeMarco's client and the Spring Garden
Civic Association for almost a year now in their present form. The matter was scheduled
for a meeting before the RCO in March. That meeting was cancelled as a result of the COVID emergency.
Understandably, we had an expedited hearing scheduled April 15th. That was also cancelled
because of the COVID emergency. On April 21st, I wrote to the Spring Gardner Civic Association
and I asked that in light of the COVID emergency and in recognition of the fact that all of this
has already been considered by the Spring Gardner Civic Association, that we proceed in an informal
manner without an in-person meeting, and that the Spring Garden Civic Association solicit
input from its members, from the community at large, by email and by the internet, and that
they could complete the RCO process in that manner. On April 28th, the Spring Garden Civic
Association said that's a great idea we will proceed in that manner and all was well. Then
Mr. DeMarco sent a letter on April 29th threatening the Spring Garden Civic Association and suggesting
that to proceed in any manner other than a live hearing would be a violation of law.
As a result of Mr. DeMarco's letter, the Spring Garden Civic Association stopped that alternative process.
On May 4th, I wrote another letter, and I asked Ms. Freeland to reconsider her decision not to hear this matter at all.
and in the interim, the Zoning Board issued its own emergency regulations encouraging
And in the interim, the zoning board issued...
that RCOs proceed by alternative means. Finally, on July 7th, Ms. Freeland sent a letter,
an email saying, well, we've decided to proceed again. So any suggestion that the Spring Garden
Civic Association has not had sufficient time to actually review this matter is false. Any
suggestion that their efforts have been valiant or that they've labored against untoward circumstances
is untrue. And any suggestion that the Spring Garden Civic Association has not had adequate
opportunity to review this matter is belied by their own letter submitted last Thursday to the
board completely reviewing this matter. I might add that Mr. Boland did not send that letter to me
until after four o'clock today.
But notwithstanding the fact
that that has been withheld from me,
that it constitutes essentially
an ex parte communication with the board,
we are ready, eager,
and willing to proceed this afternoon.
Thank you.
May I respond, Mr. Chairman?
Briefly.
Please do.
Very briefly.
My concern is not with the historical commission and the historic process that went on.
That is completely irrelevant and does not fulfill any of the requirements by the applicant in the zoning code.
My concern is that we have a proceeding that fulfills the zoning code, and Mr. Miller and his client have not notified any of the near residents of an RCO meeting for this project, and that creates an issue where an element of the code has not been followed.
While the board has encouraged an online process, and I understand why, the mailed notices were not sent for this proceeding or any RCO meeting.
The RCO meeting that the mailed notices were sent for did not take place.
So there are potentially a number of nearby residents that may not know of this proceeding.
Now, there was a poster posted, so I understand that.
That issue has been complied with, but as the board knows, there is a mailing requirement in the zoning code, and there's a requirement for an RCO meeting.
And that has not happened in this case.
It is only the RCO has tried to do it through an email process, but clearly,
And I'm sure Mr. Miller would like to make sure that this proceeding complies with the zoning code.
So I'm not understanding why there's a rush to get this hearing on when we haven't really fulfilled the spirit of the code.
We're all laboring under unusual circumstances.
I understand that.
I appreciate that the board wants to see these cases move forward.
I agree with that, but not without fulfilling the requirements of the zoning code because they have not changed.
and there were no mailed notices mailed, and that is what the basis of the continuance is.
And what happened with the historical commission is completely and utterly irrelevant. I'm talking
about compliance with section 14803, section 12, which is that mailed notices be sent
for a neighborhood meeting and that some neighborhood meeting occurs, and that has
not happening thank you here we have um mary jones from the councilman office if you it's okay
i'm going to allow her to speak please miss jones yep please identify yourself miss jones for the
record uh good afternoon my name is mary jones um i represent council president daryl clark
uh city hall room 496 philadelphia pennsylvania um we're in a firm to tell the truth miss jones
and all truth and nothing but the truth yes i do thank you please proceed right so i i just
kind of wanted to clarify the position of our office um i i did send a letter in this afternoon
to support the RCO's position on the project itself however I did not I
However, I did not, as far as I know, our office has not made a position about whether or not to continue this case.
didn't know as far as I know our
That's just not, I was told that it was going to go forward today.
So I just wanted to clarify that we hadn't taken a position on it.
Thank you for clearing that up.
I misspoke.
I was somewhere along the line.
i thought i got we got a letter the board got a letter saying that the councilman was in agreement
on the continuous but thank you for clearing that up i'm gonna say that was my mistake not
the chairs okay no problem mr chairman it's cleared up yes yes mr milton in in very very
brief rebuttal the mailings that were made that are part of our requisite submissions are all the
notice that is required. That mailing notified all of the immediate neighbors, all of the people
within the zone that requires notice of the RCO scheduled meeting and of the hearing before the
ZBA. That's what's required. And those events are routinely rescheduled and a new notice is not
required. All that is required is that you repost and that you notify the RCO, which is exactly what
has happened here. But it's fascinating that Mr. DeMarco's rigid adherence to the zoning code
that he's urging the board today, I wonder if he will insist on that rigid adherence in the next
matter in which he represents an appellant i suspect we know that he won't but the fact is
the board and the city planning department have encouraged all parties to employ alternative
means to have these rco meetings we tried we begged we asked and we finally got it in july
and they sent their letter and the matter is ready for hearing. Thank you.
Someone, Mr. DeMarco or Mr. Beller, whomever, speak to the issue about if this case
gets continued, when will there be, when will the next, when will be the earliest
that the Spring Garden folks could have a meeting regarding this case.
And then I have a question for Mr. Miller after that.
Mr. Chairman, this is Ryan Boland speaking.
I haven't asked that specific question of my client.
I know there's a couple of representatives on the line right now,
but I suspect that there's no reason,
given the flexibility of the Zoom platform,
that we couldn't do something in two weeks notice so my question to mr miller is is your client is
this time sensitive in terms of any financial negotiations or whatever do they own the property
are they in the process of buying mr chairman my client purchased the property over a year ago
my client went through the historical commission process that process left us requiring three
variances we are before you now what the reason this is time critical is because it's a burden
to carry this property without construction moving forward and we're very very concerned
about the deadline for the abatement. If this drags much longer, we risk the December 31st
deadline for the abatement, which would be a crushing penalty because of the delay. We paid
for an expedited hearing. We got an expedited hearing and through no fault of anyone, we are
where we are. However, through the fall of the RCO and through the fall of the next door neighbor
and her counsel, the RCO didn't proceed as was agreed. And then they issued their letter last
Thursday. So they've already issued their letter of opposition. I don't know what, and that's a
very, very detailed letter. It's probably six or seven pages long. I don't know that they're going
to say anything new if we delay. Yeah, I apologize if I had you repeat some of the comments that you
made earlier. I got distracted, so I apologize when I asked you if your client owned the property
or whatever. I apologize for that. Okay, I understand, Tanya, there's a couple more people
Okay, I understand, Tanya, there's a couple more people on the phone.
on the phone.
No, Chair, that's all.
All right, that's all.
I know Mr. Bowen tried to answer, maybe didn't give me the answer I was looking for.
Is there anyone who has been a party to the request for a continuance?
Could you give us an answer?
if this case gets continued could you we get this case continued for two weeks
is that a question for me to hear it's no it's a question well i guess it is for you also
tanya not unless you want to do a special day yeah i'm thinking because this is going to
probably take time but so i'll ask the general question to mr bowler mr demarco whomever is
representing those folks who are requesting a continuance can if this case is continued for
two weeks does that give you ample time to get the meet another meeting of another meeting
or another meeting with your clients and the applicant mr chairman this is ryan boland since
we're not dealing with having to use any space or anything like that i see no reason why we can't
hold a meeting within the next two weeks. We just want to make sure that the physical mailings go
out as soon as possible so that we can get this on the agenda and have the RCO schedule a Zoom
meeting. Mr. Miller? Mr. Chairman, we're not obligated. I mean, we spend the mailing. I know.
I saw you perk up with the mailing issue. Yeah, right. We've done the mailing. We've satisfied
the requirements and when things are rescheduled, I'm sure the RCO has a comprehensive email list
that will be far more effective and far less costly. I would agree that Spring Garden, I do
believe, has the resources to be able to do this virtually. So I don't know, again, I don't think
we can enforce another mailing i would ask that you do it virtually like you you want to do the
meeting and have done meetings in the past uh with planning commission and or whoever the other
departments i think there's some other uh places that you've had uh virtual hearings again because
you have the wherewithal to do that so i i would not make that a requirement that meaning i would
not make a requirement for a set another mailing other than virtual mailing emailing or whatever
So, having said that, Tanya, any idea when we can have a special hearing and I got to
make sure we have a quorum also for that.
Frank, I think you tell us, we'll have a quorum, and she said already that it's up to us, you know.
All right, I just don't know who, let's say in the 20th, Thursday.
That's much further out, isn't it?
That's three, four, that's almost four weeks.
Anything sooner?
uh say the second week in august anything available then
i mean if you guys want to do it on a thursday
what what would be the date on that thursday the 13th
13th confessor will you be around on the 13th that you're aware you make it work
Tom? Chairman? Hold on. No problem. Okay. So anyone have any concerns about that date?
I just have a scheduling issue, Mr. Chairman. Can you hear me? Yes, I can. I have, if it's late in
the day, that probably could be okay. I have a 9 30 a.m. mediation, which is going to go at least
four or five hours uh so if it's a little later in the day i can make it well it may go longer
it may go longer right i'm so i'm sorry about that it's a pre-scheduled prepaid uh long mediation
in a major civil case um okay i can do earlier i can do later i'll even do it during my vacation
the next week if i have to when you say earlier you mean earlier in the day or sooner the date
sooner an earlier date i meant earlier in the week so um what about the sixth
So, what about the 6th, which is next week, Thursday, a week from this coming Thursday?
Gives you seven or eight days, eight days, roughly.
Well, my schedule is open on the 6th, but I would defer to the RCO about whether they could get the Zoom meeting in time.
But I could do the 6th, yes.
Is there someone from the RCO who can speak to that?
I mean, again, as bad as the virtual stuff is, we can, you can really get people together a lot
quicker. True. Mr. Chairman, I'm not sure whether Patricia Freeland or Justina Navarro are on the
line, but that week would actually work much better for my schedule. I won't have much internet
access on the 13th. It's the two days of vacation I have scheduled for the summer happened to be
then and i'm gonna happen to be when i'm not clear does the six six i i'm saying the six works much
better for my schedule all right then we're all on the same page okay mr miller yes we're gonna
hold it it's roughly eight days or so all right and then we'll get back so uh calendar number
let me see if i have it here what's that calendar number confessor give it
2nd calendar number 39837 2000 spring garden street okay calendar number 39837 2000 spring
garden street is continued till august the 6th at what time are you going to do this time in 9 30
10 o'clock 10 o'clock and that'll be a special correct yes yes great okay everybody agree agree
all right thank you all thank you very much thank you good afternoon thank you
i think that's it huh let me see
oh we got yes that's it oh that's it i'm looking at the other sheet okay sorry but
all done Tanya yes chair it's a wrap thank you guys tomorrow all right thank you everyone
Be safe.
Stay safe.
Bye-bye.