It was just that the density at one time they were up to seven units. That's the last that I recall.
And I do want to say I do want to push back on that unethical slur.
The only thing that I had asked for was for her team to give intellectual assistance for developers.
They asked for no money, not in the CBA that we talked about, and Ms. Pritzer and them never produced that CBA in the time manner that they said, so that was discarded.
Anything else since then, I'm not aware of.
So I do want to just say to the chair that the most significant part was the only reason we're in this position because of Ms. Pitzer, because she was never forthcoming with the truth to tell us that she was an applicant and a representative and an interested party in the deal.
And the issue was about density, and it is confusing, but I support the councilwoman, and this really needed to be a reconsideration because the community members really weren't informed.
And I, as the chair at the time, did not know the members in the community to know that they weren't in attendance.
Thank you, Mr. Ali.
I'd like to respond to that, Chairman.
So, first of all, I wasn't involved as an investor in this project until later on.
As you may know, you don't just jump into projects with clients.
So it wasn't until quite later on.
And so by the time that Mr. Ali is speaking to this, I actually wasn't involved.
And that's why the first couple of meetings were as such.
And then it was sort of like a meeting where they asked about my all my financials and things of that nature, which I didn't feel like was appropriate or within the scope of an RCO meeting to ask about my personal financials.
And I believe that meeting was recorded by Tioga United.
So there may be that may be able to be seen.
Additionally, I did provide the notice.
I put it on the screen at the meeting and I did email it because we talked about 3323 in addition to 1820 West Venango.
So both of those were included because 3323 needed to have a second meeting as well.
And those many, a couple of blocks away on 18th Street.
In addition, we did provide a CBA and we sent it via email.
So there's proof of that after that meeting, because as you may know from an RCO meeting,
you kind of want to take back what people are saying, then put together a written document
and then shoot it out.
Additionally, the new regulations for the CBAs had come out and we wanted to kind of
cross-check with that as I was not as familiar with what the new rules were around CBAs. The
last piece of that was then a CBA was provided to me from the RCO that had additional requests in
it that I did not feel comfortable with. And all of that, again, is in writing and has been sent
both to the council office as well. So they are in receipt of both the one that we sent out and
the one that we received. So I just want to put some clarification on that as well, as I don't
appreciate my character being demeaned at a public hearing.
So the purposes of our hearing this morning was to get on the record
where the council person was, where the RCO was. What I want to do
now is I have tons of testimony that we went over the
FCD relative to near neighbors and things of that nature. The Planning
Commission, where's the Planning Commission standing on this now?
Morning, Chair Bergman. Thank you very much. My name
is Ian Hegarty. Last name spelled H-E-G-A-R-T-Y. I'm representing the Philadelphia City Planning
Commission. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
I do, sir. Proceed. Thank you. So members of the board, it's our opinion that the additional
information provided at today's hearing doesn't have any impact on hardship or impacts that the
board would be considering according to the code. And so therefore the City Planning Commission
And so, therefore, the City Planning Commission stands by its testimony from September 2021, which is as follows.
stands by its testimony from September 2021,
The property is indicated for single-family residential in the comprehensive plan.
We feel the proposal represents significant overuse.
Additionally, there is no hardship to vacant land, nor for having a property that is too large.
I'm sorry.
Accordingly, the City Planning Commission recommends that the Board deny the variance.
Thank you.
so uh we've had a lot of testimony and i appreciate everybody's time we're going to
reconsider this next week in our executive session and we will vote next wednesday morning
where we stay with this project thank you thank you thank you everybody
mr chair um this is hillary i just want to note um and tanya correct me if i'm wrong i don't
believe we have session next week so this would be voted um june 1st okay is that correct is that
Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Number four. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Sure. Thank you. MI 2022-000-447-1732
Spruce Street. Henry Clinton is the attorney. Letter of non-opposition from the Center City
Residence Association. Chair, Mr. Clinton is coming back in now as a panelist.
morning mr chairman good morning mr clinton could you state your name and spell for the
court reporter sure henry clinton c-l-i-n-t-o-n and i'd like to thank the chairman the board
miss emerson and miss sunken for taking me out of order i do appreciate that accommodation
do you swear a firm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth
i do could you identify your client and the relationship to the property
Sure. The owner of the property is 1732 Spruce, LLC, and the principal is Yuri Terenko, Y-U-R-I-Y-K-U-C-H-E-R-K-O, and he is on the call.
Our advice chair, Carol Tenere, has a few questions for you.
Hi, Mr. Clinton. Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Have you emailed the exhibit packet with proof of ownership, tax clearance, photos, and or plans of the property, a copy of the refusal or referral five days in advance of this hearing, and have you met with the RCO, and do you have a letter?
Yes, to all of the above.
Thank you. You may proceed and begin to share your screen.
Thank you, Mr. Mayor.
Thank you.
Oh, my, what is that?
Is that visible?
uh good morning mr chairman members of the board henry clinton for 1732 spruce llc
uh this is my presentation package which contains a table of contents aa to a11 which i will walk
through and ask be introduced into evidence this is my appearance statement and this is the refusal
it's a pretty straightforward matter this is an rm1 zoning district on the 1700 block of spruce
Street, and the existing situation is a doctor's office and five dwelling units. We are asking that
the doctor's office be converted or be allowed to be converted into another residential unit
so that we would end up with six dwelling units in this property, which was the historic use of
this property. Since it's RM1, the doctor's use was a previous non-conforming use, and we're
basically asking that that doctor's office be now a residential unit. We met with Center City
Residents Association and they provided us, as the chairman indicated at the outset, with a letter
of non-opposition. Again, just to give the board some perspective, you're well familiar with the
1700 block of Spruce Street. This is an aerial view. It's three properties off the corner of
18th and spruce again here's another aerial photograph of the four-story structure a closer
view of the front entrance and showing the entire front facade of the building we're not changing
the exterior we're not changing the footprint of the building the height the open space or the
rear yard this is just simply a question change of use we took photographs of the basement to show
the board that in fact there are six meters for the six uses of the building and one extra meter
for the common usage. The same thing with gas meters. There's five gas meters. Some interior
photographs just to show the board the quality of construction that's going on. Again, another
photograph of the basement indicating six hot water heaters. This is the existing plan. I was
just want to concentrate on the first floor, Mr. Chairman, but that's okay because the other
are not going to change at all. So basically you walk in the front door and immediately to the left
and immediately to the left was the doctor's office. So you can see it's a vacant commercial
was the doctor's office. So you can see.
space now because the doctor has left and we intend to convert this into an apartment,
which I will show you with the next slide. So now you will come in the front door,
walk down the hallway and enter, excuse me, enter through basically through the same area
and have, this will be a bedroom
and we're going to have a kitchen in the rear
with a bathroom.
So it's a pretty straightforward request,
Mr. Chairman, members of the board.
The rest of the documents are tax certifications
and the other pro forma documents
that one would see in any presentation before the board.
I'll just show you the zoning map,
which confirms what the refusal indicates
that this is an RM1 zoning district.
So we're asking that the entire property now become what it was ages ago.
And I'll show the board that back in 1975, this was all apartments.
Also, there's a permit in the file from 2011 indicating it once was, this is 1732 spruce, it once was a six-family dwelling.
So we're asking to return to that six-family use,
eliminate the doctor's office,
and now have this building conformed
to an RM1 zoning district that it be all residential.
So we're not altering the essential character
of the neighborhood.
In fact, the neighborhood is all residential.
This proposal or variance would be in harmony with the code.
It's not injurious to the health or safety
or welfare of the neighbors.
It doesn't impact light or air,
and it's in harmony with their previous use.
And with that, Mr. Chairman,
I'll entertain any questions for myself or for my client.
Mr. Clinton, would you want to have your testimony
adopted by your client?
Sure. Yuri, can you unmute yourself so you can testify?
You'd have to raise your hand, Yuri.
Uri. All right, Mr. Clinton. Well, you're an officer of the court. We will recognize your
testimony. Hi, could you state your name and spell for the court reporter?
Uri Kucherenko, Y-U-R-I-Y-K-U-C-H-E-R-E-N-K-O.
Right. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
Yes. Proceed.
Mr. Kucherenko, you heard my testimony just a few minutes ago while you were on the Zoom call,
correct?
yes and if you had the opportunity to testify would you adopt my testimony as your own and
as true and correct yes thank you very much sir much questions from the board no mr chairman no
mr chairman no mr jim no mr chairman questions or comments from the virtual audience
chair i see no hands at this time planning commission thank you chair bergman ian hegarty
for the Philadelphia City Planning Commission.
The comprehensive plan recommends no change
to the RM1 zoning at this location.
The proposed conversion of the office space
to a residential unit is substantially similar
to the prior use and to the existing interior configuration
of the building.
City Planning Commission recommends
that the board grant this variance.
Thank you.
MI 2022-000-447-1732 Spruce Street, I vote yes.
Carol Tenere, my vote is yes.
James Snell, my vote is yes.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes.
Thank you, Mr. Clinton.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Again, thanks for the accommodation. It's well appreciated.
Sure. MI 2022-000-399-1027 South Fairhill Street.
Letter of opposition from Queen Village Neighbors Association.
Calvin Graham is the owner, pro se.
Mr. Graham, can you please raise your hand?
He's coming back in as a panelist now, Chair.
Thank you.
Good morning, Mr. Graham.
Good morning, Michael.
Hi, could you state your name and spell for the court reporter, please?
Calvin Graham, C-A-L-V-I-N, Graham, G-R-A-H-A-M.
Right. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Our vice chair, Carol Tenere, has a few questions for you, sir.
Hi, Mr. Graham. Are you an attorney?
Hi, Mr. Graham. Are you an attorney?
I am not, no.
I am not, no.
Okay. Have you emailed the exhibit packet with proof of ownership, proof of tax compliance, a copy of the refusal or referral, photos and or plans of the property five days in advance of this hearing?
And have you met with the RCO and do you have a letter?
The company that I'm working with, the contracting company, they emailed all of this stuff across.
if by the letter I think you mean this stuff yeah my understanding of all that is yeah
okay great you may proceed and begin to share your screen
am I sharing you we're good yeah okay so this is uh the existing house um where I'm in just
now um it's predominantly a well-designed house it's about 10 years old um but it has the eight
foot setback which is now required in modern construction it's um as such it has a number
of issues that are kind of quite unique to it uh what we're proposing is to add a third floor on
top of it uh to cover the existing deck and bring it in line with the other houses on the street
The deck I submitted through has a lot of the detailing on this, but essentially the deck is a collection vessel for all the water, all the detritus, all the snow, the ice, both falling on top of my house as well as the other houses next to it, which do not have a setback.
um it's been going on for but both myself and the previous one have had issues with this we've both
spent cumulatively thousands of dollars on maintenance from pairing leaks uh constant
flooding in the winter it freezes over the snow builds up and melts into the inside of the house
it's actually not possible to clear it sometimes in the winter because the doors open outwards
again it just collects two feet of snow and freezes um the actual drain itself all the water
from the roof runs down the deck itself is an angle which actually makes it quite dangerous