Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I want to also thank Mr. Patterson for his great presentation
and for Carrie's design. As someone who, like myself, who's entrusted to the continued growth
of this corridor, this area in particular at Frankford and Delaware Avenue was of particular
interest to us since we were formed in December of 2019. Since then, besides having Rivers Casino
there, that area has erupted as our entertainment district with the Fillmore, Brooklyn Bowl,
other half brewing. But the one thing that it needed, because it is a gateway, that's where
actually where our bid starts, was how do we continue building both residential and commercial
density in different parts of the corridor that need it, specifically here. We were thrilled to
have other developers come in who have other properties as you've seen and as you and if we
can leave this one up here to the right where the site is there's actually more being developed there
at this particular height you can see that it really doesn't interfere with any there's really
not really any residential around it because what and why this is so important is we're creating
really what we believe is a walkable corridor. And what helps that, we actually just received
a $750,000 community funding award from Congressman Boyle to do a Frankfurt Avenue
connector project, basically enhancing Frankfurt Avenue from Girard all the way through the
Delaware River Trail, basically connecting to and from the river. And this fits perfectly in
exactly what we wanted to do. I don't want to belabor it because I know Mr. Patterson has our
letter of support, but I really want to strongly advocate for this to be passed. And we're very
excited for this project to really be the gateway that's been much needed. Thank you.
Very much for calling in and we appreciate your comments. Is there anyone else in the virtual
audience? You know, for other hands, Mr. Chair, planning commission. Thank you, Chair Bergman.
Excuse me, one second. Sorry, I just had a quick question, Mr. Chair, for Mr. Patterson. There was a note in the letter from the RCO that additional bicycle spaces were added, removing a refusal there. Are there revised plans that would need to be stamped if the board granted the variances?
um i believe yes there are i'm not sure if the examiner had revised the refusal i don't
think that she did but sure i would be happy to submit the revised plans okay all right we would
just need a the form and the number of pages sure thank you thank you
thank you chair bergman david facto city planning commission the proposal completed
the proposal completed its civic design review in october 2022 the civic design review committee's
its civic design review in october 2022
advisory recommendations are not an expression of the city planning commission's recommendation
or opinion regarding zoning variances special exceptions or other discretionary approvals
associated with this proposal the comprehensive plan recommends no change in the commercial mixed
use zoning at this location the project is within a 500-year floodplain and has an irregular shape
which could be argued to create a hardship affording relief from the dimensional standards
of the zoning code however the applicant has not stated by the 48 units allowed cannot be built
while granting dimensional relief the city planning commission recommends that the board grant the
dimensional variances but deny the variance for unit count thank you ron you want to respond i
I mean, Mr. Patterson?
Yes, and also with Mr. Yachts.
The ability to put the commercial space there and not to provide parking pushes the building higher.
And so to fill that building, you could do larger units or you could do smaller units.
And the number of units we selected comported with what was, I would call, market or workforce type of units that would be appropriate for the area.
So that's why the number was slightly increased.
MI 2022, 002, 904, 1000 to 1010 North Delaware Avenue.
I vote yes.
Excuse me, Mr. Chair.
Sorry, we will need to hold the vote for a revised plan so we know how many pages to put into the record.
All right.
We will hold the vote then, waiting for a revised plan.
Or, Hillary, I could accept the refusal as is and amend afterwards.
Yes, you could do that as well.
Yeah, I'd rather do that if you don't mind.
That is fine.
So I vote yes.
and do we
do we want to put here revised plans
eliminating bicycle parking
we don't need to do that Mr. Chair
just vote yes and no
provisos
the second proviso
I would still include
I vote yes with proviso
use registration for first floor
commercial space required
prior to occupancy
Thomas Holloman. My vote is yes with proviso.
James Snell. My vote is yes with proviso.
Isra, you won.
Thank you, Mr. Patterson. You have your three votes.
Thank you so much, Captain.
All right.
Number.
Okay, here we go.
Number seven, MI-2022-005-912-2400 Montgomery Avenue, Alan Nockamson is the attorney.
Recommendation of support from the United Neighbors Alliance Civic Association.
Mr. Nockamson has been promoted to panelist, sir.
hi mr knockamson could you state your name please it's spelled for the court reporter
good afternoon mr chair uh members of the board alan knockamson a-l-a-n last name knockamson
n-o-c-h-u-m-s-o-n right do you swear or affirm tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but
the truth i do could you identify your client the relationship to this property
Yes, my client is VP 2400 Montgomery LLC, and in the virtual audience is its representative, Roy Aronovich.
Okay. Mr. Hallman has a few questions.
Good afternoon, counsel.
Good afternoon.
Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to his accuracy?
did you email all the exhibits and documents as required five days in advance of this hearing
did you meet with the ordeal and do you have our yes and all respect yes and all respect
please proceed and share your screen
all right so i'm here to present 2400-02 west montgomery avenue
In our presentation packet, we have the notice of refusal.
We actually have revised plans as well, which we provided to Ms. Emerson before the hearing,
so she can review them. Essentially, the revised plan removes the seller level.
Essentially, the revised plan removes the seller level as part of our project, making these units as ADA compliant and removing any potential basement living in the property.
We have a letter of support from the United Neighbors Alliance Civic Association, which you'll see is unanimous support.
And we'll go through that letter and the rationale behind that.
Nearby multifamily variances.
So this board has seen on a few occasions requests for variants of a similar nature, and we're asking that the board equally support this project.
Maps of the area, photographs of the property, example of interior photographs of projects that my client has done in the past, and we'll go through those.
our plans and drawings, our RCO meeting notice and proof that we mailed that notice out to
affected properties, our application for appeal, our deed to the property, showing that VP 2400
Montgomery LLC is the owner of the property, and our certificate of tax plans. Again, at the
conclusion of my presentation, we will have Mr. Aronovich virtually raise his hand, be sworn in,
and then adopt my testimony as his own. We'll be more than happy to take any questions from
the board thereafter. Notice of refusal. So this is two properties, 2400 and 2402 West Montgomery
Avenue, corner of Montgomery and 24th Street, down the block from the commercial corridor on Ridge
Avenue, directly adjacent to us, as well as Cecil B. Moore. And we're looking to consolidate these
two properties of a significant size and to put eight family dwellings. So we have two refusals.
First, we're eliminating the commercial component, and we believe that that is appropriate under the circumstances.
We're trying to support the commercial corridor that's a half a block away on Bridge Avenue, as well as the commercial corridor on Cecil B. Moore.
It would be more in tune with the neighborhood to have no commercial use on this property and instead essentially swap out that residential use, excuse me, commercial use with two residential units on the ground floor.
And then the other refusal has to do with the fact that we're in the overlay. Again, because we're in this overlay, there is stricter requirements in terms of lost square footage per unit. But again, in order to help support this commercial corridor and honestly, to make this project feasible and affordable to the community, we do need this type of density.
And then here's our RCO, excuse me, our revised proviso plan form that we completed. And again, what we're trying to do is eliminate the seller. We think it's a very responsible proviso in that we're building on slab, which helps the fact that now both units on the ground floor are ADA compliant, which was important to the community.
and the second reason is we're not allowing now any limit in the basement and then these are just
the one page of plan z100 so if this board is inclined to grant or variance request we ask
they grant it with proviso one page and then here's our letter support from the united neighbors
alliance civic association as you can see is unanimous support we work diligently with them
And we did enter into a separate community benefits agreement.
What was important to them was the fact that these are now ADA compliant units on the ground floor.
And then we're actually designating one of those units for affordable housing at 80% AMI.
And we're going to agree to that by way of a community benefits agreement.
But because of the fact that we eliminated the basement living or cellar living, plus made them ADA compliant as a result, plus made one of the units affordable, and then we have other community benefits as well, the neighborhood was overwhelmingly in support of this project.
and then it's not uncommon for this board again to grant nearby multifamily uh variances and we
just gave uh again we looked at the public record uh again other than our property there are 13
other instances in close proximity to our property where that's been the case again increasing the
density within this area especially as you can see the commercial corridor here is on ridge avenue
and you can't see it up but up here is cecil b more it makes sense to help do that
and then you can see uh the uh maps of the area again we are cmx2 property um but really the cmx2
portion should be more so here and less here and this would probably be more rm1 again from
would probably be more RM1. Again, from a city planning perspective, that's what you're seeing
a city planning perspective that's what you're seeing
over here. So if you had a mirror image, you see that this is RM1, this really should be RM1 as
well. Again, help support the commercial corridor. It's all sorts to have that commercial component
over here of CMX2 in nature, leading towards the RSA buying portion of the neighborhood.
And again, you'll see again, you know, from a Google Maps perspective of where we are in the
neighborhood and the fact that Ridge Avenue and up here, Cecil B. Moore, are commercial quarters.
And then photographs of the property. This is our property. We're the corner 24th in
West Montgomery. This property has been vacant for some time. You can also see how my client
takes care of the property. In 2009, when you see a Google photo or a photo on Google Earth,
you can see that this property was in pretty bad shape, even as a vacant lot. But it has been a
vacant lot for some time, and we're hoping, you know, to develop that lot, but, you know, through
the, you know, this variance request. And then this is our property from 24th Street. As you can
see, it's pretty significant in size. And then this is our hearing notice poster as well, showing
that, you know, proof of posting on the property from both angles, Montgomery and 24th Street.
And this is West Montgomery Avenue to the right of the property, West Montgomery Avenue to the
left of the property. As you can see, there's really no commercial component in this little
proximity. Everything's on bridge and Cecil B. Moore. And then 24th Street to the right of the
property, 24th Street to the left of the property. And then again, my client is Vich Properties. This
is a company, a sole purpose entity that they own, but Vich Properties is well known in the
Philadelphia area for providing a good quality product. And this is just some examples. I always
try to show living rooms, kitchens, bedrooms, just so you can see what you would expect for this
from this project. So here's a kitchen, living room, bedroom, bathroom, dining room. So you would
expect that type of product in this property as well. And then this is just a rendering of what
you're going to see here. Again, we're not asking for any lot coverage variances, height variances.
It's a rather large property. It's a corner property. We're trying to responsibly use this.
And then this is the updated site plan. What you can see from the floor plans are this.
Each unit is built on grade on the slab. Each unit on the first floor. On the first floor,
they have direct entrances from the streets.
So first floor units each have direct entrances on the streets.
They're each two bedrooms, one to two bath, one to one bath.
You go up a flight of steps.
Second floor has three units, a two bedroom, a one bedroom, and a one bedroom.
And then the third floor kind of mimics the second floor.
You have a two bedroom, a one bedroom, and a one bedroom.
And then there's a roof deck access structure with a roof deck up there as well.
Now, we met with the community on February 8th.
154 addresses were notified of that meeting.
It was a well-attended meeting.
Proof of the addresses that were notified, proof of mailing to those addresses.
And there are applications for appeal showing that VP 2400 Montgomery LLC,
the owner of the property filed that application for appeal, or I filed that on behalf.
The notice of refusal, the project information form, the deed to the property showing that VP 2400 Montgomery LLC is the owner of the property.
And then finally, our tax clearance certificate shows a balance of one hundred dollars and seventy nine cents.
It has to do with the fact that, you know, 2023 taxes are not due yet.
So we are tax compliant.
So with that being said, I would ask that Roy virtually raise his hand and be sworn in.
He's been allowed to state your name, please, and spell for the court reporter.
Roy Aronovich, R-O-Y-A-J-R-O-N-O-V-I-C-H.
You swear for him to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
Proceed, counsel.
Yes, Roy, you heard everything I had to state about your zoning matter.
Is it true and correct?
And do you adopt it as your own testimony?
Thank you.
Questions from the board?
No, Mr. Chairman.
No, Mr. Chairman.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
I do not see any further.
I do not see any further.
Hi, Planning Commission.