um again mr ali dodd so this is what he does for a living like you know he takes these properties
they're multi-family and a lot of times you won't even see him these are he has many properties in
the city of philadelphia many of them are zoned why don't we see the window okay i know why don't
we do that yeah that's right many of them are zoned appropriately so again this is his his spec
house so but let's take a look at it worth it all right so let me see
let's see window well is here on the front and the window well is here on the back that's just
one i believe that this would be 1846 i would believe that 1832 would mimic that as well
okay and the trash storage for the units so the first floor unit would have access to rear yards
and then the second and third floors would have ventilated trash closets okay at the community
meeting there was no discussion about these projects like did was there any feedback given
Like, was there any feedback given about the projects?
about the projects?
I mean, again,
I mean, again, I'm not, Ms. Cummings is on the line.
So I really think most of the meeting, you know, dealt with North 24th Street, which
is not related to this matter.
There really was, no, honestly, there was more so like, well, this is single family
zoning classification.
We want single family.
Nothing about, hey, we have five units approved.
we would like to go down to three there again there was a comment in there well those are five
then and you know i don't know how productive that is um so i i think again your 24th is a different
story but here it is a documented history of multi-family use and or approval for both of
these properties and there are multiple instances on that block of similar use of three units and
And, you know, again, after hearing from the community, I agree with them with four units would be inappropriate for this property, just like five units would be inappropriate for the other property.
Three units is what makes sense. And that's why we went down.
And honestly, that's why we actually stated our objection to having continuance, because there was there wasn't any like substantive like discussion about like the zoning matters and, you know, anything that would be productive to have a further community meeting.
i but i defer to the board obviously and and the basement living is that a hundred percent below
grade that uh it's uh it's raised out of the ground three feet so it's like set i think it's
seven feet nine inches into the ground and then there's it's raised up to another three feet
on top of it and there are windows like in the front of the back as well i just want to clarify
is this plan accurate because it is showing a different backyard than what is shown in the
refusal um what do you mean by that so it's saying that your rear yard depth is five feet
in both properties that's what your refusal is saying but this drawing is showing it at nine
so i'm just trying to um so the one i have up here shows five so i'm just telling you this
just in front of me. And then I can go to the other one. Let me see the other one.
Actually, I'm just going to continue sharing. Let's see the other one.
Let's see. So I'm assuming that one
was 46. Let's see.
Salutation somewhere.
Is it going to say 46? Well, let's just assume it says somewhere.
my eyes are going. Let's see. Let's see the other one.
The alley. I see it.
Oh, they're right.
I was like, we went too quickly. Yeah. Okay.
Any other questions?
Yes. Question. You said that there were other multifamily uses on North 22nd Street.
Are there any on Van Pelt?
Yes, there are. 1843, three units. 1859, three units. 1811, three units. 1816, three units. 1814, three units. 1812, three units.
Are those the ones that you're talking about, the 1811, is that on the same block?
Yes, our properties are 1832 and 1846.
Okay, and 1811 is on the same?
I let me let me confirm that hold on let me just go on atlas
so that's 1812 let's just see just make sure 1832
yes okay yes I just wanted to confirm before saying but yes all right thank you any other
questions questions or comments from our attorney hillary emerson
um only to know i think it was just so so we may want to vote these separately because uh 1832 did
not have revised plans um right correct so only 1846 has revised plans okay and that one also has
a reduction of a unit so just wanted to note if the board does decide to vote these today
Okay. We'll vote them separately because there are suggested provisos for that one. Also, the commercial trash pickup proviso, that is something we could add. Yes, for both, if the board wishes. Thank you.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
Yes, Chair, we have Strawberry Mansion, and they have been promoted to panelists.
Ms. Cummings?
Thank you.
hello good morning again miss cummings just for the record could you please state your name
my name is bonita cummings and you've as you know you've already been sworn do i do i see
you on the video yet um let me see do we hear okay yeah good you've already been sworn in so
please start your testimony hi good afternoon everyone um i just wanted to indicate that
That part of the assumption here is that this board would just accept that because they want to go from five to three, that it would just be an automatic type of thing.
The community's conversation, including after the team left the call, the community state, and we continue to have conversations.
So, again, one of the concerns was the yard.
Or, you know, like, or even maybe the opportunity to talk about a lesser number of units, but we weren't given the courtesy, again, of a continuance based on some of the things that because we heard three, you know, three cases, and they all are kind of in a similar area.
Some of the comment was that many of the addresses that were given, were they legal three units?
And then some were in places that really were not relative to the block at all.
So I just wanted to add that in that, you know, the assumption just that, you know, the board would say fine just because the indication is that, oh, well, we have a permit for five, but the permit expired.
So you don't have something that you can do.
According to the conversation, the permit expired.
They didn't get that five done in a timely manner.
So now when you're coming back, you're coming back with a reduced number.
So, you know, the community asked for more time.
We weren't granted.
And I just wanted to indicate that because there were some things in looking at the properties,
particularly referencing yard depth and things of that nature that we wanted to have more conversation about.
So thank you.
Thank you, Ms. Cummings.
Anyone else in the virtual audience?
I see no hands.
Planning Commission.
Thank you, Chair Bergman, and good afternoon.
David Vecta with the City Planning Commission.
Chairman and board members, this testimony is for both 1832 and 1846 North Van Pelt Street.
The comprehensive plan recommends no change to the RSA-5 residential single-family zoning at this location.
These properties were rezoned in 2014 in accord with recommendations in the comprehensive plan.
At that time, these properties were rezoned RM-1 residential multifamily.
there is no unique physical condition of either property that would prevent them from being used
in strict conformity with the zoning code the city planning commission recommends that the board
deny the proposed use variance for multi-family dwellings in both properties and the proposed
dimensional variances thank you we'll do the uh mr chair can this quickly quickly respond sure
um there's a documented history for each property of multi-family use and my understanding is that
the building permit is active for the five family dwelling there's also a documented history on that
block of six other instances of triplexes you know for those reasons i believe the board should grant
the variance thank you thank you number seven mi2024 006 055 1832 north band pelt street i vote yes
with Proviso, commercial trash pickup.
Cheryl Gaston, my vote is no.
Tanita Graham, my vote is no.
Iowen, my vote is yes with Proviso.
Barron Leonard Palmer, my vote is yes with Proviso.
Thank you.
Number eight, MI 2024-006-103, 1846 North Bend, Pelt Street.
I vote yes with proviso.
Revised plan, one page, stamped by CBA, February 11th, 2025, and additionally, commercial trash pickup.
And Mr. Chair, would you like to add a proviso, maximum three dwelling units?
Okay, isn't that the revised plans?
That is, but we usually put that in separately as well.
Maximum three dwelling units.
Cheryl Gaston, my vote is no.
To the grandma, my vote is no.
My vote is no.
I win, my vote is yes with provision.
My vote is yes with proviso.
Thank you very much.
Is there anyone in the audience here or the virtual audience whose case has not been called?
No, it's not.
I see no hands.
Thank you very much.
thank you uh staff thanks everyone see everyone tomorrow at the bright and early at 9 30 a.m
you're gonna be encouraged this week