Thank you.
chairs there are 57 attendees and you can start when you wish thank you good morning everyone my
name is bill bergman and i will be chairing this morning's meeting with me is our vice chair
Ismael Shahid. Present, Mr. Chairman. Our board member, Cheryl L. Gaston. Present, Mr. Chairman.
Our board member, Tanetta Graham. Present, Mr. Chairman. Our board member, Michael Johns.
And our board member, Taya Nguyen, will be joining us shortly. Also present is Ryan McSherry,
our attorney, and our executive director, Ian Haggerty. Here's our virtual format.
Proceedings are being recorded. With your participation, you agree to be recorded.
Video will be available by contacting ZBA Executive Director at phila.gov. For a court
stenographer, we ask attorneys and witnesses to identify themselves before testifying.
If you're participating by phone, press star 9 to raise your hand and star 6 to unmute.
To enter an appearance statement, call 267-270-5548.
Leave your email address and address of the property in question.
Finally, the question answer box on the screen is not for testimony.
All questions should be directed to our executive director.
That's ZBAexecutiveDirector at phil.gov.
So let's look at our schedule for today.
Number 17, MI 2024-004-773-4926 North 12th Street.
That case is continued.
Are there any other requests for continuances?
Good morning, Chair.
This is Jasmine Webster, and I will be your co-host for today.
I have a human by the name of Darlene Threatt
And she has been allowed
Oh sure
Good morning counsel
Good morning commissioners
Darlene Threatt
Could you spell your name for the court stenographer
Darlene D-A-R-L-E-N-E
Threatt T as in Thomas
H-R-E-A-T-T
Do you swear or firm to tell the truth
The whole truth and nothing about the truth
Yes commissioner
And your case is 611 Destin Street
Yes commissioner
Okay. Could you give me an update, please?
Commissioner, I'm withdrawing this matter today.
Okay. Thank you very much.
Thank you. Have a good day.
So, thank you. So, number two, MI 2023-001-445-611 Dixon Street. That case has been withdrawn.
Are there any other requests for continuances?
Yes, Chair. I have a hand up by the name of Albert Sylvester. They have been allowed to speak.
good morning could you please state your name and spell for the stenographer
good morning my name is albert sylvester a-l-b-e-r-t last name sylvester s-y-l-v-e-s
that's v as in victor e-s-t-e-r do you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth
nothing but the truth yes sir what case you are you calling about sir
um i'm asking for a continuous for the zoning uh for my building at what's that location
3-6-4-5 North 19th Street.
okay all right so okay so this is your first listing um the case will be continued so
MI 2024-004-775-3645 North 19th Street.
Cases continued.
And thanks for calling us, sir.
Any other requests for continuances?
Yes, Chair. I have one more hand up by the name of Mark Feynman. They have been allowed to speak.
Yes, sir.
I have one more hand up by the name of Mark Thiemann.
Good morning, sir. Could you please state your name and spell for the sonographer?
Yes. Good morning. My name is Mark Feynman, M-A-R-K, F as in Frank, E-I-N as in Nicholas, M-A-N.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
What case, sir, do you want to talk about?
I am calling in reference to MI 2024-004752.
The address is 1923 East Allegheny Avenue.
Are you the owner, sir?
I am not.
I'm counsel for the owner.
And the owner is Demma Realty.
And I have the president of the company present with me also.
All right.
So you want a continuance?
That is correct.
I noticed that the tax clearance is outdated, so we need to get a current tax clearance.
And I also noticed that there were the photos of the posting missing.
Otherwise, everything else is ready.
All right.
Thank you.
So MI 2024, 004752, 1923 East Allegheny Avenue.
Cases continue.
Thank you, sir.
Any other requests for continuance?
I see no more hands at this time, too.
Thank you.
Number six, MI-2023-005-685-1335 McKinley Street. Is Mr. DeMarco present?
Yes, Chair. He has been allowed to speak.
Good morning, Mr. Chairman.
Good morning, Mr. DeMarco. Could you please state your name and spell for the stenographer?
Richard DeMarco. D-E-M-A-R-C-O is my last name, spelling.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Counsel, this is the third listing. We still don't have exhibits. Could you give us an update?
Oh, yeah. I wasn't aware it was listed today, Mr. Chairman, so my apologies for that.
But I'm almost 99% sure this client has not been responding to inquiries.
I'm 99% sure this client is not moving forward.
But I can't say that I spoke to her.
So here's what we'll do.
We're going to continue one more time, sir.
All right.
And I'll confirm it.
I'm trying to get that straightened out.
Yeah, I'll get it straightened out.
And sorry, I wasn't aware of what we were talking about.
No, no, no.
No, thank you.
So number six, MI 2023-005-685-1335 McKinley Street, case continued, marked must be heard.
We're going to go back here to number three, MI 2023-001-512-1307 Moymencing Avenue.
That case has been withdrawn.
Number 10, MI 2024-001-286-513 South 13th Street, along with number 11, MI 2024-001-287-1305 Rodman Street,
And also number 13, MI2024-001-548-1307 Rodman Street.
Is Ann Johnson Sachs or Eric Sachs in the audience?
Chair, I see no one by that mean.
All right.
So all three of these cases, number one, number 10, MI 2024-001-286-513-South 13th, MI 2024-001-287-1305-Rodman, and number 13, MI 2024-001-548-1307-Rodman, all three cases are continued, and Mark must be heard.
Thank you.
We're going to go to our add-on list.
Mr. Chair, I just wanted to know that it's Taya and I am here now.
Oh, thank you, Taya.
Thank you.
Okay, so number one, MI 2024-002-410, 2913 to 15 Kensington Avenue, I vote no.
What if no?
Cheryl Gaston, my vote is no
Tana Graham, my vote is no
my vote is no
Ioan, my vote is no
Ishmael Shahid
my vote is no
thank you
excuse me board member Gaston can you just
certify that you watched the video of the
hearings for this one
sorry I hereby
certify that I watched
the video
what was the date I'm sorry Hillary
15 Kensington
no no yeah but i think there was a date oh yes there were two it was an october date and a
november october the 23rd and november the 19th yes i hereby certify that i did uh uh review uh
both of the uh uh videos for uh those hearings thank you great excuse me chair this is the
court reporter. I had some difficulty with Mr. Johns' audio. Okay. Mr. Johns, vote one more
time, please. My vote was no. Thank you. Thank you. All right. And number two, and I see with
number two that Taya will certify and also Cheryl Gaston will certify on this. So MI 2021-004-633-
3900 Main Street, I vote yes with proviso per amended refusal dated 9-18-24.
I recuse from this one. Oh, Cheryl Gaspin, I certified, I, Cheryl L. Gaspin certified
that I watched the video of the November 19, 24, 2024 hearing in this matter and my vote is yes.
Seneta Graham, my vote is yes with proviso.
Oh, I'm sorry. My vote is yes with proviso. Excuse me.
Ty, I wouldn't certify that I watched the video of the July 16,
2024 hearing in this matter, and my vote is yes with proviso.
Number three, MI 2024
001 631 2732
West Montgomery, I vote no.
Michael Johns, my vote is no.
Cheryl Gaston, my vote is no.
Tanetta Graham, my vote is no.
Iowan, my vote is no.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is no.
Number four, MI 2024, 004-727-4815 North 9th Street,
I vote yes
with Proviso
no two-family household living.
Michael Johns, my vote is yes with Proviso.
Cheryl Gaston, my vote is no.
Tanada Graham, my vote is yes with Proviso.
My vote is yes with Proviso.
Ishmael Shahid, my vote is yes with Proviso.
Thank you. We're going to go to our regular list. MI2023. Oh, I'm sorry. I have an add-on first. We're going to go to number 14. MI2024. 002-798. 11707. Stevens wrote, Otebek Markadav is the owner. We do have an interpreter.
Interpreter, please.
I see no hands raised at this time, Chair, for the interpreter.
Could we check to see if there's an...
I'm sorry, Chair, excuse me.
I was just going to ask.
If the interpreter is in the audience, please raise your virtual hand.
Okay, I have someone by the name of Nasibia.
Why don't we do this? Why don't we go on to the next case, and could we check with the interpreter's office to see if they have someone in route, okay?
Sounds good.
All right. Thank you, Fatina. All right. We're going to move to number 16. MI 2024-004-768-8638 Jackson Street. This is a pro se.
Excuse me, Mr. Chair. I believe there is now a council for this matter, Zen Jin.
Okay. Oh, good. Thank you. Thank you.
Oh, good.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Good morning, counsel.
Zen Jin has been promoted to penalist.
Good morning, Chair.
Good morning, counsel. Could you please state your name and spell for the court stenographer?
Yes. My name is Zen Jin, Z-H-E-N. Last name is J-I-N.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Could you identify your client and the relationship to this property?
My client is the owner of the property, Marlandi, I'm sorry, Marlandani, Vela Derez Hernandez.
And counsel, just for a point of information, there is a recommendation of opposition from the Upper Holmesburg Civic Association, 21 to 3.
I understand that.
Okay. Okay. All right. Our vice chair has a few questions, sir.
Good morning, counsel. Good morning, counsel. Do you agree with the reading of the refusal or stipulate towards accuracy?
Have you emailed in all the required documents and exhibits that's needed and required to proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing?
I believe my client actually directly submitted through the system ahead of time. Yes.
Thank you, counsel. Please proceed and share your screen.
Thank you.
I'm going to share with the board what I have as exhibits.
My apologies.
One second.
Take your time.
Can the board see my exhibit on their screen?
We can, sir.
Thank you.
So as a preliminary matter, we are aware, my client and I are both aware of the opposition
from the Homensburg Association, Upper Homensburg Association.
For today's purposes, what we're asking the board is we're withdrawing our request for
the proposed two-family dwelling.
There is a secondary refusal item, which is here on the refusal in front of you, and that
is a proposed stair from the ground to the rear deck, leading from the deck to the rear yard.
We're asking for the board's review of that particular refusal today, mainly for the purpose
of allowing my client to have easier access to the rear yard from the property. So this is the
property in question. This is the interior. The deck staircase in question is here.
My client will be making changes to the property to remove the second kitchen that was installed
to make sure that it complies with single family dwelling. However, the primary use of the property
would then primarily be above the basement level, which you see here in the photograph on the right
portion. And generally, they'll be coming out of the rear of the first floor to the deck.
He primarily wants the ability to still be able to access directly to the rear yard,
rather than having to come around the property to the basement level each time, and then having to
come out the rear door in the basement level. So for the purpose of today, that is the variance
that we're seeking before the board. The rear yard itself is completely fenced off with a legal fence.
And the stairway itself, its presence will not negatively impact the neighbors.
It is simply an access for the owner to be able to more easily access their own rear yard.
So we would ask the board's favorable consideration in that aspect of the refusal only.
Thank you.
I have additional exhibits.
Let me bring your client on.
Marlon Donnie, can you raise your hand virtually to be identified?
morning could you please state your name and spell for the stenographer
good morning my name is marlon donny valveris hernandez it's m-a-r-l-a-n-d-a-n-i
be like victor a-l-l-a-d-a-r-e-z-h-e-r-n-a-n-d-e-z
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, sir.
Please proceed, counsel.
Thank you.
Manandani, did you see my presentation before the board and hear my representation?
Can you verify what I've represented to the board is true and correct and adopt it as your own testimony?
It is correct.
Thank you.
Questions from the board.
Questions from the board. Is the current deck, was that approved?
is the current
The deck itself is within code and it's not an item of refusal, so it is approved.
My question, there's no access to the rear yard from the basement level.
no there is there is an access there's an there's an existing door um that would access the rear
yard from the basement level however with the deck and the railing there um i can put up the
picture again you can see that it's it's a very low you know even though the overall height is
relatively high um the actual the actual railing for the deck makes it relatively low it's very
easy to hit your head actually coming out from the door walking past that area i see and where's
the do you have pictures of the door for the unfortunately i do not believe the door would
actually be right under so it's actually under this window i have plans here that should be
able to i wonder if the plans would have it i'm sorry i did not submit these exhibits so it's
little understood so the the door is actually on the on the plants i've seen before it's actually
right here under the deck okay so there is access to the rear yard from the property without having
to walk around well the interior was um the interior doesn't actually now have a stair
between the first floor and the basement level
because they're on the interior.
So they would actually have to walk outside,
come around into where the garage used to be,
and then access through to the back.
So because that was its own separate unit,
we're going to remove that as a unit
and use it as essentially storage and garage,
or at least storage.
The garage no longer exists,
But it would still be extremely inconvenient for the owner to come down through that floor-basement level to walk to the backyard.
And that's because of the conversion of the property without having permits initially, correct?
All right.
Were the RCOs able to hear the amended plan removed for the single family?
So the RCO, we actually explained to the RCO that, well, this was the original plan.
We explained to the RCO that what we're looking for was the deck rail stairs, as well as two family.
The RCO said that they're absolutely against the two family.
And also, they did not, we had a neighbor up here, but they did not specifically address the stair as much.
So no, the RCO did not get a separate meeting together for the deck, just the stairs.
They wanted to just make a decision on the overall proposal at the time that the meeting took place.
And also, we were not allowed to stay for the vote, so I'm not sure what the final discussion was at the RCO.
is the current plan the same plan that the rco saw or were there further revisions made after
that meeting no there was no revisions made after the meeting okay so this is exactly the same as
what the rco saw the difference is that you're now proposing that it not be a conversion to
to family, but you want to keep the deck and keep the storage dead.
Correct.
Other questions from the board?
Questions from our attorney, Ryan McSherry.
No, Mr. Chair.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
Yes, Chair.
I have been handed by the name of Shakira A.
They have been allowed to speak.
Good morning.
could you please state your name and spell for the court synopsis?
Hi, my name is Shakira
Avenue. My first name is
S-H-A-K-E-A-R-A
last name A, B as in
Boyd, N as in Nancy, E as in
Edward, why?
Where are firm to tell the truth, told truth,
nothing but the truth? Yes.
Are you a neighbor?
Yes. Please
proceed.
Please proceed.
I'm a neighbor at address 1836 North Neutrona Street.
Oh, no, this is, you have the wrong case. We're going to get to that a little bit later, okay?
Oh, no, this is you have the wrong case.
We're going to get to that a little bit later.
All right. Anyone from there in the virtual audience for 8638 Jackson Street?
I see no hands at this time, Chair.
Planning Commission.
Thank you, Chairman, and good morning, David Fecto, F-E-C-T-E-A-U, with the City Planning Commission.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, sir, I do.
Please proceed.
Thank you, sir. Chairman and board members, the comprehensive plan recommends no change to the RSA-5 residential single-family zoning at this location.
The city changed the zoning maps in this neighborhood in 1971.
At that time, the zoning of this property was zoned R-8, which became RM-1 residential multifamily, with the adoption of the new zoning code.
The proposed stair from the ground to the deck will not injure the use of adjacent property.
The City Planning Commission recommends that the board grant their proposed variants for exterior stairs leading to the deck.
Thank you.
Ryan, would this be, if I'm so inclined, a yes vote with a proviso, no two-family household living?
Yes, that would be appropriate, Mr. Chair.
So MI 2024, 004-768-8638 Jackson Street, I vote yes with proviso. No to family household living.
Michael John, my vote is yes with proviso.
Cheryl Gaston, my vote is no.
Tanetta Graham, my vote is yes with proviso.
Tywin, my vote is yes with proviso.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes with proviso.
Thank you.
Number one, MI-2023.
Excuse me, Chair.
If we can go back to the one with the interpreter, she is here.
Thank you very much.
That's number 13.
Good morning, interpreter.
Owner is Otabek Mohameddav, is the owner.
And our interpreter, please.
Nasibir has been promoted to penalist.
Morning, could you please state your name?
It's spelled for the court stenographer.
Of course.
My name is Nasibir.
N is in November.
A is in Apple.
S is in Sam
I is in Ice
B is in Boy
A is in Apple
My last name is
Abdullayva
A is in Apple
B is in Boy
D is in Diamond
U is in Umbrella
L is in Lion
L is in Lion
A is in Apple
E is in Elephant
V is in Victor
A is in Apple
You silently swear or affirm
that you will interpret accurately, completely, and impartially
from English to use it back
and from use it back to English
to the best of your ability.
Could you please call the owner
of the property for us?
It's Otabek Makamadov,
if I'm saying it right,
it's M-A-K-H-A-M-E-D-O-V.
Could you please call that owner?
Otabek Mohamedov.
Is this your name, Otabek?
He's here, but he's muted, I think.
He what?
Muted.
He's here.
He's amongst the two students.
Tell him on mute, please.
Yes, I'm here.
I'm sorry.
Thank you.
Could you have him state his name
and spell for the court stenographer, please?
My first name is Otabek, O-T-A-B-E-K.
My last name is Mahamedov, M-A-K-H-A-M-E-D-O-V.
Could you please tell him,
do you swear or affirm to tell the truth,
the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Our vice chair has a few questions for him.
Yes, good morning.
Have you emailed in all the required documents and exhibits?
Have you emailed in all the required documents and exhibits that's needed
that's
and required to proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing?
You are.
Yes, I did it.
Thank you.
You can proceed and share your screen.
Let him share his screen.
And could you also tell him that we understand that the Somberden Civic Association has voted in his favor, and there's a letter of non-opposition from Council Member O'Neill?
or could you have him start his presentation
and when he shows things
I'll tell you if in fact we have it
we have this
document
we also have the next
document
yes I have it
keep moving
we have that project information form
yes it's here
we saw
we saw the deed
we have that
we're good
make it easier
could he move
to the plans
and also the photos of the
project.
Project is not planning.
What's his name?
That's where he died. Okay, I see. That's where
he posted. Thank you.
Rahmat.
That's the Somerton
Civic Association. We have that letter.
There's an overhead view.
Could you explain? I see where his
is. Okay. Thank you.
Rahmat.
hold on hold on one minute go back
so that's where he's parking his car right now am I correct
my car is a Hyundai Palisade it's ECV
what did he say
it's not my car it's my friend car
My car is Hyundai Palisade.
It's SUV, a big car.
My car is big.
It's not mine.
My friend's car is in.
But he has his friend's car in the parking place that he's using.
Is that correct?
Okay, so the picture was done when he visited us as a guest.
All right.
So the issue is, he's created a room in the garage, is that what happened?
but my parents arrived, and my mom and dad
My mom had the cancer and she had to go under the operation.
And so it was difficult for her to lift up upstairs as I have my little children.
So yes, there are seven, four and one and they are too noisy.
I have to create a room in the basement for this reason because of your health condition.
because of your health condition after the cancer operation.
after the cancer operation.
Does he have photos of the basement?
Yes, I have it.
Is there a bathroom in the basement?
I have a toilet.
There is a toilet and a toilet.
Okay, so, yes, there is a bathroom, but I didn't do any pictures of them.
Is there a kitchen in the bathroom? A kitchen there, too?
No, no kitchen there.
There's a room. Do they sleep down there?
yeah they sleep and have a rest
what's that again they sleep and have a rest there
there's a bathroom down there too
when they want to eat they go upstairs is that what you're saying
Yeah, we bring to the basement when we cook something.
She cannot.
Could you show us the plans? I noticed he had some plans. Let me see the plans.
So, I guess this is the plan.
All right. Questions from the board.
I did have a quick question. So the entrance into, so you have that separate stair that goes up the side that goes into the first floor for the main house.
i just want to i think i think that's what i read i know i talked too fast um but i think i
answered my own question so you have to ask him that thank you another question
but looking if he could scroll up to the plan for a second i'm just trying to see is there
going to be any delineation in the front pad uh the marking the difference between the parking
space and the pedestrian walkway to get to the door.
So this is the entrance.
Yeah, and I was asking,
is there a separate walkway
for people to get to the
like a protected walkway
for people to get to the entrance in the new
proposed plan
now that the parking space is going to
solely be outside
I think
yes I have it
I didn't have the pictures on it
but I have the
separate
to be clear there's no pictures and it's not
So, to be clear, there's no pictures and it's not demarcated on the plan, but it is already installed.
Yes, it is not drawn in a plan. However, it is there. We didn't change any plan.
the path
was there
from the old project.
thank you. Other questions
from the board?
Questions or comments
from our attorney? No, Mr.
Chair. Questions or comments
from the virtual audience?
I see no hands
at this time, Chair.
Planning Commission. Thank you,
Chairman, and good morning, David Efecto.
the city planning commission chairman and board members the comprehensive plan recommends no
change to the rsa2 residential single-family zoning at this location the city rezoned this
neighborhood in 1978 at that time this property zoning was left unchanged from the prior r4
which became rsa2 after after the adoption of the new zoning code despite the presence of garages
accessory surface parking appears to be a common if unregulated occurrence in this block face
the city planning commission recommends the board grant the proposed use variants for accessory
off-street surface parking
mi 2024 002 798 11707 stevens road i vote yes michael johns my vote is yes
Cheryl Guest, and my vote is yes.
Tinella Graham, my vote is yes.
Ayahwin, my vote is yes.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes.
Thank you.
Thank you, Interpreter.
We appreciate your help.
Thank you.
My pleasure.
Thank you so much.
Thank you.
All right.
Number one, MI2023-00633, 1307 West Sesquanah Avenue.
David Devin Eptor is the attorney.
There's unanimous support from the 37th Ward and a letter of non-opposition from Council Member Young.
Morning, Council.
Devin Uffa has been promoted to panelists.
Good morning, Chair. Can you hear me?
Good morning. Good morning, Council. Yes. Could you turn your video on, please?
yes thank you um could you state your name and spell for the court stenographer
yes devin d-e-v-i-n um last name u-q-d-a-h you swear or firm to tell the truth the whole truth
and nothing about the truth yes could you identify your client the relationship to this property
Yes, the owner of the property is self-inked.
It's a nonprofit, and the CEO should be joining the call.
All right, and our vice chair has a few questions for you, sir.
Good morning, counselor.
Do you agree to waive the reading of the reviews or stipulate to its accuracy?
Have you emailed in all the required documents and exhibits as needed and required to proceed with this case?
Five days in advance of this hearing.
Thank you, council.
I'm asking my screen.
Please. Yes.
Are you able to see my screen?
We can't share.
Okay. So this property is owned by self,
inc which i mentioned is a non-profit the address is 1307 west suskehanna avenue
just a table of contents this is a copy of the deed to self-ink
um this is pictures of the surrounding area
this is also pictures of the map of the of the area
so this is a suskehanna hair syndrome it's closer to the corner of the block
this is the letter of referral um the property the proposed used to be a group living um basically
that they're going to house it's like a transgender house where people are going
from homelessness to regular residential housing um so it's just group living
It's a picture of the outside of the property.
it's a picture of the outside of the property it's a picture of the
It's a picture of the inside of the property when you come inside.
It's multi-level.
Bathrooms, some of the setup of the bedrooms.
Again, another bedroom, another bathroom.
It's a hallway, another bedroom.
Another bedroom, another bathroom.
is this in use now yes yeah so what currently how it is used now is a cap on the amount of
people that can actually live there so what our proposed use we're going to increase the amount
of people who can live there by changing it to group living and how many how many could you give
me an idea what that means pardon me could you give me an idea what that means like how many
are there now and what's it going to go to?
Three now. It probably
will go to
over six, but not
to exceed nine.
The property is pretty large.
It's three levels. That's one of those
old North Philly houses that
are pretty massive that a lot of people turn into
triplexes.
And there's their bedrooms.
This is a notice to the RCO.
This is a notice. This is a posting.
this is a copy of them having zero realty taxes due and then this is a letter of support from the
rco and that's the end of my presentation and i'm here could you bring could you bring your
client on please yes one second uh dr dash
do you see his client
there she is
Dr. Dish has been allowed to speak
could you please state your name and spell for the court stenographer
good morning my name is Dr. Shrolana Dash
s-h-i-r-l-a-n-a
last name dash
d-a-s-h
we're affirmed to tell the truth the whole truth
and nothing but the truth yes sir
I do please proceed
counsel good morning
Dr. Dash good morning
have you heard my presentation
regarding 1307 West Susquehanna Avenue
yes I have
do you verify that it's true and adopt
my statements yes I do
questions from the board questions from the board um yes are there plans to uh house anyone in the
basement no they're not and my other question is uh since you've been operating has there been any
kind of complaints or whatever from the near neighbors no we have not not we have not received
any complaints, ma'am. Okay. Thank you. You're welcome. Questions from the board? Yes. My
questions. What age of residents are we talking about here? Their homeless services. Anyone from
the age of 18 to 70 can be a resident based on referral by the Office of Homeless Services with
the city oh okay that's where you get the yes ma'am we get them from the services and the services
provided are just you know shelter food yes food shelter and case management services we have case
managers on site to provide service yes all right okay thank you you're welcome ma'am is there a 24
hour oversight yes there's 24 hour staffing seven days a week 365 days a year including holidays
yes and how many clients how many clients in that location we have three looking to expand it
we have two other adjoining properties that are likewise being utilized according to their zoning
so a total of how many total of many i think the one house has 10 i think that is 10 that would be
23 so that particular house so your council said we'll have no more than nine yes sir okay
the questions are three levels and each they're three story properties each of them that one yes
other questions from the board
questions or comments from our attorney mr chair
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
I see no hands at this time, Chair.
Planning Commission.
Thank you, Chairman, and good morning.
David DeFecto with the City Planning Commission, Chairman and Board Members.
The comprehensive plan recommends no change to the RM1 residential multifamily zoning at this location.
The zoning of this property dates to the original zoning maps adopted by Council in 1933.
The appellant has shown that proposed use will not cause detrimental impacts beyond what would reasonably be expected.
The City Planning Commission recommends the board grant a requested special exception for a personal care home.
MI 2023-000-66633, 1307 West Susquehanna Avenue, I vote yes.
Michael Johns, my vote is yes.
Cheryl Gaston, my vote is yes.
Tanetta Graham, my vote is yes.
Iowan, my vote is yes.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes.
Thank you, counsel.
Number four, MI 2023-005-586-1206 Annan Street, Clemente Amazon is the attorney.
There is unanimous non-opposition from the Pachong Square Civic Association.
Fementa Imadon will be rejoining us as a panelist.
Thank you.
good morning chairman members of the board
morning counsel could you please state your name and spell for the court stenographer
of course clementa amazon that's spelled c-l-e-m-e-n-t-a last name is spelled a-m-a-z-a-n
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
I don't see counsel on the screen.
Do you have your video on, counsel?
My video is on. Are the other board members having issues seeing me?
We don't see you. Oh, there you go. There you go.
I see you now.
Now? Okay.
you disappeared again
I can see myself on the screen
can you guys see me now
why don't you start sharing your screen Clemente
see if that how that works
there you go
All right. Number one, could you please state your name and spell for the court stenographer?
Of course. Clemente Amazon, spelled C-L-E-M-E-N-T-A. Last name is spelled A-M-A-Z-A-N.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Could you identify your client in a relationship to the property?
Of course. My client is Amanda Tersky. She is the owner of the property, along with her husband, Joel Tersky.
our vice chair has a few questions good morning council do you agree to wait the reading of the
refusal or stipulate to its accuracy yes i do have you emailed in all the required documents
and exhibits as needed and required to proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing
yes we have thank you council please proceed you've already shared your
thank you as was mentioned previously today i'll be presenting 1206 annon street during my
presentation i will review the refusal we did receive a letter of non-opposition from the rco
a prior zoning permit that was issued for the property in 2001 exterior photos including the
posting photo of the property interior photos of both units they'll notice that was sent to
the community regarding the meeting our certificates of mailing showing that the
notice was in fact sent to all addresses as required by the city the application for appeal
project information form disease showing that my client and minette excuse me my client amanda
and joel chersky on the property and the certificate of tax clearance
we are looking to have the use reinstated for a duplex as you will see in my presentation
although the property is owned rsa 5 in 2001 a zoning permit was issued to allow for the use
of a duplex. My client purchased the property. It was already fitted out as a duplex. It was
listed to her as a duplex. We did attempt to resolve this issue administratively. However,
We did attempt to resolve this issue administratively, however, because a rental license was not pulled, we now have to go through the zoning process once again.
because a rental license was not.
We did meet with the community on November 12th, and we did receive a letter of non-opposition 7-0.
During the vote, it was raised if anyone was in opposition to the project.
No one voted in opposition, so we did receive unanimous non-opposition.
The opportunity to provide unanimous support was not provided.
And as I mentioned, this is a pre-existing use, as we'll see, we do have a zoning permit
that was issued in, excuse me, September 13th, 2001.
We did attempt to use this permit in an effort to obtain a rental license for the duplex
However, because a rental license was not pulled immediately after the issuance of this
permit in 2001 from the prior owner, my client was unable to move forward with the zoning
administratively to reinstate that duplex use here we have a photo of the exterior of the
property prior to the posting and here we have a photo of the posting of the property the property
was timely posted for the hearing and we do have more plans again this is a pre-existing duplex
use that we are looking to legalize we have the basement you enter from the first floor
there's a vestibule area you can make your right to enter the lower level unit which is a two
bedroom there's one bedroom in the front and one bedroom in the year rear with the living room and
kitchen and bath if you're going to the upper level unit you enter through the first floor and
you go up the stairs at which point you can enter the living room dining and kitchen area
there is one bedroom in the rear as well as a bath and then the third floor is available for
that unit as well with two bedrooms and here we have photos of the interior of the property for
the first floor unit and as contact my client did previously live in this property when she
initially purchased it and rented out one unit she has since moved out although she does live nearby
and she's currently listing both units so this again is a photo of the lower level unit
unit, the bedroom for that particular unit, another shot of the bedroom.
And here we have the rear yard that's available to that lower level unit.
This is also where trash is stored for that particular unit.
And here we have photos of the second unit on the second and third floors.
Here we have the home office, a photo of the kitchen and living area as well as a photo
the bedroom another photo of the kitchen area one of the bathrooms bedroom what's been converted
into a bit of a closet storage and here we have the notice that we sent out on october 29th
regarding the cba hearing that is scheduled for today at 9 30 as well as the community meeting
that was scheduled on november 12th a copy of the refusal was sent out with that notice again
we are looking to reinstate a pre-existing use for this property that was granted in 2001
most of the properties that were notified of that november 12th community meeting
the certificate of mailing showing that we did in fact send that notice out as required by the city
our application for appeal that was submitted in connection to this particular project
the project information form
and the deed um where my clients did best interest in the property
suits herself and her husband although she did initially purchase this property in 2004.
and our certificate of tax clearance so with that um if i can have my client amanda tersky
i believe she's in the virtual audience raise her hand
we share her hand
yes chair she's been allowed to speak hi could you please state your name and spell for the
court stenographer hi my name is amanda tersky a-m-a-n-d-a t as in tom you are s as in sam
ke you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth
yes i do please proceed council amanda did you hear my presentation today yes
and was it true and correct yes and would you adopt it as your own testimony yes thank you
council there's there's no living space in the basement am i correct
that is correct all right thank you questions on the board
Did I hear correctly that the property was purchased by your client in 2000?
correctly that the property was purchased by your client in 2004 council yes my client purchased
the property prior to her being married in 2004 they were active indeed that was provided um
includes her husband how long did you stay here less than an hour ish ish please proceed okay
She invested in the property to herself and her husband in 2013, I believe.
I see.
So she lived in the property from 2004 to 2013, using it as, was it duplexed then when she purchased it?
Yes, it was duplexed then.
It's continuous use.
As I mentioned, the reason we weren't able to move forward administratively was because the rental license was not pulled at the time that we initially, or the prior owner, received the zoning permit.
But it has been continuously used as a duplex.
When she lived in it, she was renting one unit.
Thereafter, when she moved out, she rented out that first floor unit.
So it's always been a duplex dating back to 2001 when we had that zoning permit.
Okay. And you say that she was renting out the property before?
She was renting out one unit when she lived in it, which predated the requirement for the rental license.
Once the requirement was issued, she did not obtain the zoning permit.
She was, excuse me, the rental license.
She was unaware of that.
And so now we have to go through the zoning once again to legalize it properly and pull the rental license.
Thank you.
Other questions from the board?
Questions or comments from our attorney?
No, Chair.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
I see no hands at this time, Chair.
Planning Commission.
Thank you, Chairman, and good morning.
David Fecto with the City Planning Commission.
Chairman and Board members, the comprehensive plan recommends no change
changed to the RSA 5 residential single-family zoning at this location.
The City changed the zoning maps in this neighborhood in 1998 in a community-supported map change.
At that time, the zoning of this property was zoned R10, which became RM1 residential
multifamily with the adoption of the new zoning code.
This appears to be a legalization of a previous legally constructed duplex.
the city planning commission recommends the board grant the requested use variants for two
dwelling units thank you mi 2023 005 586 1206 annon street i vote yes michael johns my vote is yes
cheryl gaston my vote is yes
tennetta you didn't have your mic on i'm sorry tennetta tennetta graham my vote is yes
Iowan, my vote is yes
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes
Thank you, counsel
Thank you
All right, number five
MI 2023
005 621
254 South 54th Street
Joseph Consul is the attorney
There's a letter of non-opposition
from Cobbs Creek Neighbors
Chair, I don't believe
that I see Joseph Consul
in the virtual audience.
About P.S.
Investment.
No, Chair.
I do not see them in a virtual audience as well.
All right.
So MI 2023-005-621-254 South 54th Street.
Cases continued.
Mark must be heard.
Thank you.
Number seven, MI 2023-007-092-789 South 2nd Street.
Harry Cook is the attorney.
Harry Cook has been promoted to penalist.
Good morning, Counsel.
Could you please state your name and spell for the stenographer?
Good morning, Mr. Chairman.
Harry Cook, H-A-R-R-Y-C-O-O-K.
You swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
I do, sir.
Mr. Cook, could you identify your client and the relationship to the property?
Yes, my clients are Vince Papale and Janet Papale, the owners of 789 South 2nd Street.
Vince Papale and Janet Papale, the owners of 789 South 2nd Street.
It is.
It is their principal residence.
Our vice chair has a few questions, sir.
Good morning, counsel.
Do you agree to weigh the reading of the refusal or stipulate to his ex?
Yes, I do, Mr. Shahid.
Have you emailed in all the required documents and exhibits that's needed and required to proceed with this case?
Five days in advance of this hearing.
Yes, I did.
Thank you, Mr. Cook.
Please proceed and share your screen.
Mr. Cook, just for a point of information, we do have a letter of opposition to the Queen Village Association.
And I understand you've had conversation with Hillary relative to this case and that this case will be held until we get revised plans. Am I correct?
That is correct. We have revised plans, but they have to be in the Z100 form for Hillary in order to be sent back.
Please proceed, sir.
Thank you. And as a point of clarification regarding the QVNA letter of opposition, it's an opposition to the eight-foot balcony, but they are in non-opposition to the as-built four-foot balcony, and we'll get into that as we proceed.
Thank you. Please issue.
So, good evening. Good morning, Mr. Chairman, members of the board. I'm here on behalf of the Papales. They live at 789 South 2nd Street. It is their marital home.
They engaged a contractor to build an addition in the rear of the property with a balcony,
previously had a balcony, and they were represented.
It was represented to them that all permits were appropriate and all the work was within scope.
And as it turns out, it was not.
And we are seeking relief for what we consider a few de minimis dimensional variances.
and we'll get into that. First, I want to just go through an overhead of the block face.
On this block, you have about 10 properties facing 2nd Street. Eight out of 10 of them
are non-conforming lot sizes, including our property. We have about 1,100 square foot
property so that's going to impact um the open space uh refusal irrespective of what would be
built on this parcel um as you can see a lot of these properties have almost complete lot coverage
our property uh here at 789 uh has this balcony here but otherwise underneath the rear yard is
preserved. We're in the RM1 zoning district. So here are the plans that were reviewed by L&I
and refused. As to the eight-foot balcony, as you can see, it extends all the way to the property
line. In the proviso revised plans, nothing else has changed except this balcony is cut in half.
to show the as built condition and we'll go into some context of how that happened um if the board requires it but just know that the four foot balcony and the addition is nine foot six inches uh the neighborhood coordinating RCO is in non-opposition to that
um here's a rendering of the uh of of the property as you can see uh and from the overhead the lines
of sight to this balcony are very um not open by neighbors it's very private not going to be
peering over into people's properties, et cetera from the side. And again, we will get the proper
format proviso plans in. So as to the specific refusals, with the reduction in size of the
balcony from eight to four feet, we assert that the first refusal, the balcony extension will
disappear, but you'll still have the three remaining refusals. Balcony at rear yard,
balconies are prohibited in the rear front side and rear yard. Maximum occupied area shall be 75
feet, whereas we're proposing 83.7 percent coverage, and the rear yard shall be 144 square
feet whereas we're proposing 134.74 square feet um so you know again lni for the purposes of zoning
code measurement measures the rear yard encroachment from the exterior of the addition
even though it's not on the first floor the rear yard functionally is preserved it's usable
The rear yard functionally is preserved. It's usable.
The occupied area refusal, again, this is a non-conforming lot.
the occupied
Any addition that would be consistent with the other builds on the block would likely trigger this sort of refusal.
And in addition, there are other properties on the block that have greater coverage than this property.
And again, as you saw from the overhead, there are roof decks, there are balconies on this block.
The rear yard area refusal, we contend, is rather de minimis.
It's a 9.26 square foot variance from the code, and we would love the board to consider that in terms of how de minimis it is.
Here is a photo of the property from the outside.
It's a beautiful home.
Here is an angle shot of the as-built balcony.
balcony, and the area underneath that is private and usable rear yard.
Here's a side shot.
This addition is really to provide some additional storage space and a veranda, you know, to enjoy coffee in the privacy of
the backyard. Just some more shots of the house. This is not a rental. This is their home. They
take pride in it. They are an elderly couple who relied on a contractor to do what was right.
And now they have been left holding the bag. It's not like they were putting in additional units
and trying to make additional money.
This was just a straight-up dimensional issue.
In the packet, the deed is available for view,
our letters to the RCO, notification for our meeting,
proof of mailing, tax payment,
good through December 31st of this year.
And as to the specific letter of opposition from the Civic Association, I just want to go through a letter sent by one of their chairs.
On October 10th, we've attached our letter of opposition of the applicant's request for variance to construct a new eight-foot-deep balcony.
As you will see in our letter, the owner already had a balcony constructed that the zoning committee found acceptable, but is not shown on the drawing which generated the refusal.
Hence, we have the proviso plans in process in the Z100 format.
Here is the letter, again, highlighting while it's opposition, they consider the as-built.
provided that the owner has the work inspected, accurately documented, legally permitted.
All of those permit applications are pending the zoning approval. Without that, we can't
finish out updating the building permits, et cetera, in order to get the certificate of
completion on this project. With that said, I think under the circumstances, my clients meet
the condition of hardship that they did not create it under 14303. This is not going to
impact the neighbor's light and air. This is not going to burden infrastructure in the city of
Philadelphia. It's in harmony. Generally, you're allowed to have balconies. You're allowed to have
additions. And furthermore, under Hertzberg with the relaxed standard, this board is free to take
into consideration the context of the block. And again, these are all non-conforming. 80% of them
on the block base are non-conforming lot size. Most of them do take up either the same or greater
amount of coverage. And that's an important context issue. And furthermore, in order to
bring this into strict compliance with the code, that addition would have to be deconstructed by
about a foot and the balcony removed entirely, which would be a great expense to a couple who
reasonably relied on a contractor who are not developers who are just regular Philadelphia folk
and got caught up in the system with this so with that
And got caught up in the system with this. So with that, I'd like to, unless the board has questions for me, I'd like to call on my clients to adopt my presentation as their testimony.
Why don't you do that, Mr. Cook?
Thank you. Vince, Janet, please raise your virtual hands.
Vincent Peppel has been allowed to speak.
Hi, could you please state your name and spell for the stenographer?
Mr. Papali.
Unmute yourself.
Hi, sorry about that.
Hi, could you please state your name and spell for the course stenographer?
Here we go. Vincent, V-I-N-C-E-N-T, Papelli, P as in Paul, A-P as in Paul, A-L-E.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Yes, sir.
Please proceed, Mr. Cook.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Papelli, did you hear my presentation to the board today?
Yes, sir, fully.
Was it true and accurate to the best of your understanding?
Yes, it was, sir.
Do you adopt it as your own testimony?
Absolutely, sir. Thank you.
Questions from the board.
Yes. Can you go back and show me where the entrance to the balcony is from the interior of the property?
Is it from a dining room? Is it from? I'm not sure if I can tell.
To the rear yard or to the addition?
To the addition?
The addition's on the second floor, so it's off the bedroom.
Oh, okay.
It's off the bedroom.
So this is the addition here.
You still have the space underneath, fully usable rear yard underneath, and it comes
off of a bedroom.
It's got closet space, and it's functional that way.
Okay, so can you show me the pictures?
Thank you.
Nice to see the pictures.
so is this a main bedroom yes this is off the master bedroom oh okay
so then to get to what you're coming to from the bedroom through these that's right
bank of closets that's right and then you can go out onto your your your balcony okay and
um all right and then uh the support through this is yes am i seeing
support for this because this is like second floor right yes so we had two meetings uh the
first one was in april and then the next one was in august uh the board from the uh oh there are
beams underneath, yes.
Oh, okay.
Yes, I'm not talking about support for community.
I'm talking about support for the...
I'm sorry.
Let me see where that is.
Just a minute.
So you can see.
They're still beams.
They're supported by steel beams
for the mission,
and the balcony is cantilevered.
Right there.
oh okay okay i see where the support system is okay here here here yeah yes yes all right okay
thank you thank you all the questions from the board can you confirm what year the edition was
completed the edition was completed in 2020 i want to say 2022 in june or august of june around
June-ish of 2022, and during that time period, there was a lot of interaction with LNI and
the contractor, and we do have open violations that in order to clear, we need to first get
the zoning, but in conversations with Inspector Robert Keenan, you know, he did feel that
the balcony and the addition will fit the context of the block.
and then can you expand on the nature of the of the failed inspections
sure so they all related essentially to um building permit beyond scope and so on and so
forth there you know that i don't know if that's necessarily a specific zoning question it's going
to have to be you know through the through the inspection process assuming this is granted uh
Through the inspection process, assuming this is granted, the building permit will have to be updated.
There will have to be, you know, inspections to make sure it's up to the building code before the department issues a certificate of completion, which is akin to the certificate of occupancy for a new structure.
And then I'm just curious, was a structural engineer used to?
and that's all you know there's no unsafe order here there is no please you know we didn't have
to get a make safe in order for the department to to make their determinations it's just a straight
up don't have zoning don't have building permit but otherwise it looks good they were in there
throughout some of this process so yeah i'm not concerned and the department i don't think is
concerned about safety at this point.
Other questions
from the board?
Questions
from our attorney? No,
Chair. Questions or
comments from the virtual audience?
no hands at this time, Chair.
Plany Commission? Thank you,
Chairman, and good morning, David Vecta with
the City Planning Commission. Chairman and
Board members, the comprehensive plan
recommends no change to the
rm1 residential multifamily zoning at this location um the dimensional variances for
occupied area and rear yard area are minor and in keeping with the purpose and spirit of the zoning
code the city planning commission recommends the board grant the proposed variance for a balcony
extending into the rear yard and grant the proposed dimensional variances for occupied area and rear
yard area. Mr. Cook, as we spoke earlier, we're going to hold the vote on this until we have the
revised plans. Thank you. I'm not sure of that, but if we have the revised plans by next Wednesday,
we'll vote next Wednesday at 9.30 a.m., okay? But everything else is closed on us other than
revised plans. Thank you so much, sir. Thank you, Mr. Cook. Yes.
Number eight, MI 2024-001-037, 4245 O Street.
Vern Anastasio is the attorney.
There's a letter of opposition from Juniata Park Civic Association.
there's also comments made relative to the rco the applicant also gave us i'm having some issues
with my volume please i noticed that sure go ahead can you hear it you can hear me i'm better
now right i talked about there is a letter of opposition from the rco um there's a lengthy
thing that apparently they wrote
and also there is
a petition in support
from 16, with 16
signatures on it. Just for the
record, could you please state your name and spell
for the stenographer?
It's Vern Anastasio, A-N-A-S-T-A-S-I-O
on behalf of
Elizabeth Cuevas
the RCO
Go ahead. Do you swear
or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing
but the truth? I do.
Vice Chair?
has a few questions for you good morning council do you agree to wait to read another refusal or
stipulate to advance i do have you emailed in all the required documents and exhibits that's
needed and required to receive in this case five days in advance of this hearing yes i have thank
you council please proceed and share your screen thank you mr chair just for the record the rco
letter was a result of after two meetings um no one from the block attended none none of the
immediate neighbors attended the meeting that's when we went out went door to door up and down
the block and got the signatures of the 16 or so immediate neighbors who live on o street
42 45 0 is for the legalization of a two-family dwelling in an existing structure
as i said exhibit six uh that i move into uh evidence is a signed petition
of all immediate neighbors who live on Oath Street itself.
My client several years ago, during the height of the pandemic,
was diagnosed with cancer.
Her brother moved in to care for her.
Her brother moved in to care for her while she was fighting cancer, went through the chemotherapy treatment.
In order to do that, they did build out the basement, which is a walkout sort of situation, into a separate unit for him to live and care for her.
And again, this was during the pandemic, 2020 and 2021.
Ever since, my client has lived in one unit, owner-occupied, and her brother lives in the other.
There's never been an intention to lease this unit out, and it is their intention to keep it family-occupied.
These are the photos.
I'll pull out of the plant a little bit here.
This is the first floor.
and the basement apartment.
Again, it's a complete walkout basement from the rear, 532 square feet.
There is ample trash storage and would have zero negative impact on the block or the immediate area,
which is demonstrated by the overwhelming support of people who live on the block.
there's the second floor by the way other bedrooms that are associated with the first floor
here's the rco notification that was mailed here are all the addresses was mailed to again
the meeting was very poorly attended 95 individual households were mailed which means
we have more than 10 percent
actually almost 15 percent of the impacted households who've signed that petition in support
here's the proof of posting
and the signatures that are moving into evidence along with the deed and other materials
mr chair because my client and her brother did this under mitigating circumstances during the
pandemic and as she struggles with her treatment and because they have no intention of leasing this
place out to anyone, but instead to keep it within the family. I'm requesting the granting
of this variance. With that, I'd like to have Elizabeth Cuevas raise her virtual.
Council, before we go to that, so in the letter from the RCO, right, they said the owner of the
property currently lives in Florida and a relative will be living in a space with a rental unit being
used and that at the meeting one of the residents of the block was present and stated so there was
somebody from the block at the i don't i don't recall there being anyone from the block in in
that meeting and my client lives in the building um yeah during the winter times during her recovery
when she could she would fly to florida but my client lives in the building and the other unit
it is for her brother. Okay, thank you. Yep. I don't remember anyone from the block being present.
You want to bring your client on? I did call her. Yep, Elizabeth Cuevas.
Elizabeth Cuevas has been allowed to speak. Good morning. Could you please state your name
and spell for the court stenographer? Elizabeth Cuevas, E-L-I-Z-A-V-E-T-H, Cueva, C-S-K-U-E-V-A-S.
Where or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Yes, sir. Please proceed, counsel. Thank you. Elizabeth, did you hear my presentation to the
board this morning? Yes. It's true and accurate to the best of your knowledge.
yes and do you adopt it as your own testimony yes this this property is for you and your brother
this this property is for you and your brother is that correct yes and it was built out well
is that correct yes
in the middle of the pandemic while you were undergoing chemotherapy treatment is that correct
yes okay and you personally went door to door on your block you and your brother went personally
on the getting the signatures of everyone who lives uh surrounding you is that correct yes sir
yes thank you i have nothing further questions from the board
what's the ceiling height in this uh
basement here just under eight feet okay
so this is of course of course everything would have to be pursuant to the building code as well
if we were to get either a permanent or temporary variance here.
And so this is the variance request is for a two-family?
That's correct.
Just to legalize the build-out of that basement, the walkout basement.
But they'd still be subject to the building code and the CO process after this.
To be clear, we're legalizing construction that was done without a permit.
prior that is completed that's correct during during the covet crisis still without a permit
they were issuing permits during the covet wasn't wasn't easy to do oh and and yes uh but yeah
everything that i've presented has been stipulated to and then i just want to clarify because i feel
like you you it was unclear to me when you were presenting so the brother is living in the the
rental unit or the brother staying with your client in her unit and then there's an additional
rental unit that's also being rented out no there's nothing being rented out nothing's being
rented i know the she lives in her home uh during the covet uh shut down in the year you know the
year that was covet or so uh she was diagnosed with and been treated for cancer he then can
And during that process, he converted that basement so that he could stay with her.
And that's where it is.
Are there any other multifamilies on the block?
Only on the corners.
It's pretty much a single family block, correct?
That's correct.
Again, overwhelming majority of those owners support this petition.
Thank you.
Other questions from the board?
questions from our attorney
not at this time Mr. Chair oh Hillary Emerson is back yes questions or comments from the
virtual audience I see no hands at this time chair planning commission thank you chairman
and good morning David Fecto with the city planning commission chairman and board members
the comprehensive plan recommends no change to the RSA-5 residential single-family zoning at this
location. The city changed the zoning maps in this neighborhood in 2018 in accordance with a
community-supported map change. At that time, the zoning of this block face changed from RM-1
residential multifamily to RSA-5. The appellant requests two dwelling units while one is allowed.
This is a single family block face. There is no unique physical condition or circumstance of this property that would prevent it from being used in strict conformity with the zoning code. The City Planning Commission recommends that the board deny the requested use variance for two dwelling units.
Mr. Chair, if the board is so inclined, perhaps there could be some sort of owner occupied with proviso on the on the on the issuance of the permit so that he can remain there.
It would have been that owner occupied with one rental would have been legal under the previous classification of RM1.
so obviously it's going to be up to the board but i'm more inclined to make it a temporary
variance will expire in three years and to see how we stand with that very well mi 2024 001 037
4245 uh o street i vote yes temporary variance will expire 12 11 27. michael johnson my vote is
yes with proviso. Cheryl Gaston, my vote is yes
with proviso. Senator Graham, my vote is no.
Taya Nguyen, my vote is no.
Bill Reword, 3-2.
That is correct.
The appeal is granted with the provisional.
Thank you.
Thank you.
All right.
Number nine.
Thank you, counsel.
Number nine, MI 2024-001-174-1819, Natrona Street.
There's a letter of opposition from Strawberry Mansion Community Development, and also Council Member Young has a position of neutrality.
Chair, I'm going to recuse myself from this case.
Yes, thank you.
Mr. Toppin.
Mr. Chair, we now have a second counsel on this matter that entered their appearance this morning. Steve Masters, on behalf of Neighbors, I guess he can explain who his clients are. So now we have two counsel. Thank you.
So, Mr. Toppin, could you identify yourself, please?
Yes, Sherman Toppin, last name T-O-P-P-I-N, at 1800 JFK Boulevard, suite 300.
Do you require a firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
But you identify your client and the relationship to the property.
Yes, my client is Brian Watson.
Brian Watson, he is the sole member of the LLC, BJA, real estate LLC.
And he should be on the call.
I'm not sure exactly where he's calling from, but he should be on the call.
you stipulate to the reading of the refusal and agree with this accuracy i do mr masters please
good morning mr chair members of the board steve masters s-t-e-v-e m-a-s-t-e-r-s
or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth
i do mr masters could you identify your client clients yes my clients um are the 1800 north
natrona street neighbors um and i know that uh the the leader of that um group um calvin williams
will be uh i will be presenting his testimony uh today and perhaps uh one or two other members of
the block. Thank you. Mr. Toppin, please start your presentation. Oh, could I, Mr. Chair, just before
Mr. Toppin starts, since I came on very late, I don't have a copy of the exhibit binder, and I
would appreciate receiving that from the staff at their earliest opportunity. And prior to logging
on, I did email that to you, Mr. Masters, so you should. Oh, great. Okay. But it'll be in front of
you as well. It'll be in front of you as well. Okay. So are you okay, Mr. Masters? You have?
Yes, I see it. Yes. All right. Perfect. Perfect. Perfect. So my screen is shared. And again, I have
the pleasure of representing Mr. Watson here in this property. Well, this is going to be an
interesting presentation because it really has brought to the attention a change in the nature
of the block. And I think the board will begin to hear that. We represent, we're representing today
1819 North and Trone Street, as you can see the picture in front of you. As I move down through my
typical exhibit binder, we're going to go over the statutory things, things like the refusal deed,
which we've already stipulated to, application, project information sheet, maps and photographs,
plans. But we'll be focusing our attention on what took place at the RCO meeting that is brought
together that has brought with us actually two letters from the rco one in support which was
which was issued on december the 6th with a positive vote an overwhelmingly positive vote
in behalf of our of our um application and we also have a retraction letter from the rco so
it's the interim between these two letters that i think we'll be centering some attention on
But getting right down to it, we'll walk through our packet here. We're seeking simply a two-family household living in this particular residence. Right now, it is zoned for a single family, and that is the only refusal we'll be addressing today.
And here we have the deed for BGA in our Exhibit 2, in our Exhibit 3, our Application for Appeal,
which echoes what we'll be talking about today, Project Information Sheet, which is required.
The Exhibit 4 is basically that Project Information Sheet.
Five gives you a center of the ZBA map concerning the block. Here we are. The block only has 28 houses that front on North Natrona Street. Here's a large church here at RM1. But of this 28 houses is where all of the attention will be focused, I guess, as we proceed.
5 gives you a center of the ZBA Map concerning the block. Here we are.
and the other affected areas in the street um find are either not facing the trona and
uh many of those folks did not attend the rco meaning as a result our property is right here
from the roof line so we're looking at a block that has some sorry some blight behind it as far
as vacant lots there's about two vacant lots on the block and ultimately it's filled in with existing
homes. This is a visual of the block, I guess, looking east, I believe. Here's the subject
property off to your left hand of the screen, and on the reverse image is here. So it's a pretty
tree-lined block, very typical North Philly street-lined block, and parking only on one side
of the street, and this is North Nutrona. Our conversation is going to center on the subject
property which is unoccupied and no construction has occurred there it's not nothing has happened
in this in this particular property so here are some of the pictures from the so from the street
you'd see this as you walk in the front door you know it's it's basically a shell property as you
move through the property there is no nothing it's not habitable at this time as you can see
as we move through these photographs living room area just completely you know vacant and it would
need to be restored completely for living front door you can see hallway going up to the second
floor the photos tell a story of a property that needs complete renovation and that's what we have
here so you move up to the top floor you'll see again you know no area of the house is suitable
for residency at this time and um and again and if you go into the very rare of the property you
know the mechanicals have some aging but it's probably the only thing salvageable perhaps is
this furnace um don't even know if this hot water heater works and those are the sort of the interior
pictures getting right down down to the plans i'll make this smaller so that we can take a look at
what's proposed. And I think I'll have to make it a little bit smaller. So here, so
what is proposed, let me just move through here. This area is the first floor. So what
is proposed is as you walk onto the front porch here, that there will be two entrances.
One entrance, 101, that you can see indicated here, would move into where there's currently
a window that would that existing window would be there would be widened to the end there would be
a door immediately to the left of that window and you'd walk in and you have living room area
kitchen and the bathroom in the rear with the bedroom so this would be a studio walking
downstairs you'd see it's an unfinished basement there's nothing down there no bedrooms down there
no access only accessible to the lower level unit as you go from the porch again going upstairs you
have you come here and there's a kitchen with a living room area kind of open concept to the
front with a bedroom with its own bath in the back so that's bedroom number one climbing up
the steps you enter onto the third floor of the property where there are three bedrooms and two
baths one would have its own and this is a sort of an ensuite on the top floor rear and the front
it'd be a shared bath between this bedroom which could be a bedroom or just a sort of a small room
could be a child's room or a bathroom and then there's the front bedroom on the third floor
so the layout is is very typical and the layout would match the same roof line as as well as the
the presentation that you see all up and down that street so there would be no difference in
how it appears as you can see even looking at this this will end up being a five uh one two
three four five bedroom house if it were single family the variance that we seek we believe that
this is a this is a block that uh the in for it to be renovated completely and for it to be
economically feasible to do so we believe that this particular block um that this configuration
allows for it to be done in a manner that is appropriate for just the owner to make actually
not lose money on his particular investment i'm sure there's arguments for and against that people
people say you can do any kind of house and it'll sell in the city but this my client wants to
house and it'll sell in the city. But this, my client wants to present living that will
present.
enable people who reside in this neighborhood to live in this neighborhood and to rent in
this neighborhood. People who are young, young people or young families would not be purchasing
or looking to rent a basically a five bedroom house. But in this configuration, it allows for
the house to be accessible to people with modest means and so on. So this is part of the reason
and the reason that rationale for this particular property be renovated as it is so let's talk about what happened next in the RCO meeting that took place that was noticed this is our notice there was 102 as you can see from this map addresses that that were received our notice of this application but only 28 of those actually front north in the troner others are blocks behind and blocks around fronting on 33rd street or Montgomery
summary, and those folks had not shown as much interest in this particular application.
These are labels from the addresses that we mailed to and the proof of mailing that went
out for each and every one of those 102 residents.
So we had the RCO meeting, and this is, before we even get to that, in this exhibit is basically
that pictures of the posting of the ZBA hearing notice on the front door of the property.
and the client had some difficulty getting actual a tax cert we have proof that he owes that he's
paid all these taxes so this is just um we'll we can we can supplement the record with the tax cert
the typical tax cert but um other than that there are zero taxes owed by jba and we can assert we
can prove that so what the exhibit that i have now the the rco meeting just turning our attention
to what happened there on October the 21st was very well attended. It was not one of those
meetings where nobody showed up. This was a meeting where there was almost 40 people on that call
from this street and from the RCO. My client and myself were the only two that were
from us. The rest of the people were from the community as well as the RCOs. In that particular
meeting, we obtained a, we went through it and there was vigorous testimony from one group in
particular. I think the gentleman, Mr. Masters' client, who will be talking perhaps later,
he actually came on the RCO meeting and then testified that he's a guardian for single family
on the block. Like that was his opening, showing a picture of him and various folks sitting with
him and he proceeded to to say that that this block should not be anything but that and that's
his his position um and and and we we respected that and we understood that and we expected to
see the people who supported him to be in that meeting because he so vigorously presented that
position he went on to say that he himself owns a three-unit or multi-family property on the same
street so in in his in as perplexing as that might sound that's exactly what he presented that he has
the only multi-family on the block and he doesn't want anyone else to do so and upon asking him well
if he's so vigorously opposed to a multi-family property why would he not revert his to a single
family. He had no great action. I'm going to object to hearsay at this point. Mr. Williams is going to be
testifying. We'll let him testify, but counsel, why don't you finish, Mr. Toppin?
Sure. And as we were getting down to the vote, which is our last page here,
sorry, there were 30 people in the meeting. 12 were in support and only two were opposed. I think
the final vote, this letter was a bit confusing because it has, I guess, you know, vote counts
on both lines. It looked different here. But again, there were 12 in support and there
were four opposed and five abstained. And this was the meeting. And at the end of the
meeting, we received this letter from Reverend Williams saying to us that although we were
successful in the vote that some others that had called him afterwards and that he wanted us to
reconsider and withdraw basically which my client wasn't inclined to actually do but in any event
that was what took place we got this letter we submitted it accordingly but then yesterday we
received a letter of opposition from the very same RCO with the same count I called and I call I'm
sure if mr masters will call reverend williams today but he spoke to me he told me that some
people had called him wouldn't identify who and that he reversed his position as a result of
those calls i told him that if if he entertained the calls or the or other individuals
that if if he entertained the calls or the or other individuals then then the those in the rco
meeting and was changing his opinion as a result of that because we've got 12 people from that
street who voted in support that we should have the opportunity to do the same he he didn't have
any really good answers to that but we did believe that he was very good the meeting was very well
um modulated by moderated by him but this after piece was a surprise to us and and that and I
voiced that to him and he said that he basically felt that the community's strenuous the calls that
he received afterwards changed his opinion basically and I don't know there was no other
RCO meeting he's at the board met and reversed as a result of his receiving calls after the RCO
meeting between our our vote and we had no opportunity to go and present there so
ultimately this is not any more complicated than that i think there there may be a number of people
that are here today to voice their their opposition or paint or or support on either side but our
folks were present they they were present in the in the duly conducted meeting and both rcos not
just the main rco but the second rco had all of their people there and you see the outcome
of the those that attended that rco meeting so the the council person has has been neutral as
with respect to this particular property because i think there is this question of what happened
that night and what has happened since um i'd like at this time to bring that that is the i guess the
the testimony that I plan to prepare,
but I'd like to ask Mr. Watson to adopt my testimony
and bring him forward to ask any questions
that the board may have of him.
Mr. Watson, if you are in the virtual audience,
please raise your hand.
you're watching
brian watson has been allowed to speak please unmute yourself
good morning sir could you please state good morning could you please state your name and
spell for the court stenographer brian watson b-r-y-a-n-t w-a-t-s-o-n
All right. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Please proceed, Counselor.
Oh, yes. Mr. Watson, have you been listening to the testimony that I've been making on behalf of yourself and this zoning application?
Yes, I have.
And is it true and accurate as to your hearing?
Yes, it is.
And would you adopt it as your own if you were testifying?
Yes, I do.
Okay. At this point, I'd like to welcome any questions that the board may have.
or a cross-examination, Mr. Masters, may I?
Mr. Masters, do you want to cross?
Yes, thank you.
Mr. Watson, is it true that you own two properties
next to each other on this block?
Yes, I do.
All right.
And is it also true that the property next door to 1819,
you went before the zoning board just a few, a year or so ago,
looking for a duplex at that location?
18-21, I was turned down on that property.
I went through the process, the RCO.
We didn't get a vote, but they said they opposed.
So, yeah, so I went, instead of continuing my ZBA,
I went on with the ZBA meeting.
But the RCO, we never got a chance to vote.
There was no vote.
So they sent a letter of opposition, but there was never no vote.
All right, but let's just try to clarify this.
So 1821 North Natrona, that's the location that you tried to get a duplex in 2023, is that correct?
Yes, it is. Yep, that's the one I just explained to you.
And when you went to the zoning board, they voted, they denied you the variance, isn't that correct?
They denied for opposition from the RCO.
they made a decision do you have did you get a zoning permit for a duplex at 18 at 1821 masters
he's the property was denied he agreed to that okay uh and at that point do you do you recall
that council president um clark was in opposition of of your application i don't know who was i don't
know the relevance um i don't know the relevance mr master a denial is a denial
So let me go to the next question. Mr. Watson, this was in 2023. Has anything changed between 2023 and today?
this was in 2023 has any has anything changed between 2023 and today on this block uh to change
the the situation for your property now at 1819 and the property at 1821 is there any difference
in the block from 2023 to today yes what's the difference the difference is i was i got a letter
of approval from the rco i'm talking about physically on this block has anything changed
in terms of how many folks have single-family homes on the block,
things like that.
Has that changed at all?
I wouldn't know if anything changed.
I don't know who else.
Like, I only go through my ZVA hearings and my RCO mix.
I don't know if anybody else was approved or not,
so I wouldn't know that.
All right, so your testimony is you have no information
that anything has changed since 2023.
I just told you, yes, something changed.
The RCO, I passed.
I won from last year to this year.
i i was approved i got a letter of support that's what changed
i understand but i'm talking about on the block physically on the block there's no differences
you asked me the same question over and over again i i i yeah mr masters i think he said
he don't look at anything other than what he owns so why don't we move on yeah all right i have no
further questions so so sherman instead of opening up to the board i'm gonna let mr masters put his
and then we'll open it up to the board and the public all at one time, okay?
That's fine. That's fine, Mr.
Mr. Masters, would you please make your presentation?
Sure. I'm going to just do a brief opening and then I'm going to call Mr. Calvin Williams as my witness.
So, members of the board, this case, an exact duplicate of this case occurred in front of you in 2023.
At that point, the board composition was different, and one of the board members was actually the head of the RCO who was opposing this, creating a duplex at 1821.
um so we now are are faced with the exact same situation this this individual has bought two
houses on this block uh apparently with the intention to convert single-family homes into
into duplexes uh and despite the fact that that the block uh was made it clear that they did not
want him to do that in 2023 he's come back again and it appears that the the people who were coming
to that rco meeting in support of him were not from the block they were from farther away
objection there's been no evidence that these members were not from the block
that's the evidence i will be presenting with my witness why don't why don't why don't we hold up
on what you said and if you have a witness let your witness testify okay sure um
All right, let's go for, let's call Mr. Calvin Williams.
Calvin Williams, if you are in the virtual audience, please raise your virtual hand.
Calvin Williams, is he allowed to speak?
Mr. Chair, can we promote him to panelists?
calvin williams has been promoted to panelists
good morning could you please state your name and spell for the stenographer
yeah yes uh good morning my name is calvin williams c-a-l-v-i-n williams w-i-l-l-i-a-m-s
we're a firm to tell the truth the whole truth is nothing but the truth
Yes, I do.
Please proceed, Mr. Masters.
Can I ask that Mr. Toppin stop sharing his screen at this point?
I will.
And can Mr. Williams, are you able to turn on your video?
It's automatically on, but I can't see myself here.
I don't know how to do that.
All right.
Um, Mr. Williams, uh, can you, um, share with the board, uh, where you live and how long you've
lived at that location? Yes. Uh, uh, my name is Calvin Williams again, and I've been living
at that location for 30 years, 1814 North Nechona street.
So are you across the street from, from the house that we're, that we're here for today?
Yes, I am.
Directly on an angle across the street from both of the properties.
Let's first address the blight issues that were raised by the attorney for the applicant.
He claims that there are two houses that are blighted on this block.
Can you describe what this block looks like and if there are any houses that are blighted?
Can you describe what this block looks like and if there are any...
There are no blighted houses as far as our block is.
There was a fire across the street from me a year ago that completely destroyed Cush's house, and it's gone now.
The two neighboring properties were damaged also. The one that's right close to it is in the process of getting insurance and redoing it.
The property next to it has been completed. All the damages have been done and the families moved back in.
And I would add that both of those properties right across the street from me are new members of our block, new single family members of the block.
And one of them has brought into our block our first born new child, and I don't know how long, as a single family homes, both of them.
So, Mr. Williams, did you ever have any kind of leadership role on the block, like a block captain or something?
Yes, I had been the block captain for a very long time, and we kind of tried to pass that on and give everyone an opportunity.
But when I first moved in the block 30 years ago, I took it upon myself to be a good civic neighbor like everyone else I was always taught and clean the front of my house.
And matter of fact, the Moore Street next door, I spent the first six, seven months to two years in cleaning the block because traffic from people would bring the johns there and I had to clean up herphalastics and all that.
And it was through that effort that the elders on the block tapped my shoulder to become the block captain.
And that's when I became totally active in that part.
So let's talk now about the two houses, the 1819 and 1821 North Natrona Street.
Are you personally familiar with those two properties?
Yes, I am.
before the attorney mentioned a picture
that I held up at the RCO meeting.
It was a picture of six of seven of our elders
that we had honored on the block years ago.
They're no longer with us that we honored.
And I just wanted them to see the picture
of the people that been on that block.
In that picture was the parents
of the latest owners and neighbors across the street, the Tuesdays, the house that is in
question now. And the house next door is also a picture near of the McCalls, the two old
traditional families on the block. And the last ones that were within those homes were their
relatives, both sons of those deceased parents, were the last persons in the house. Now, who owns
it now outright? I don't know. I only know the Tuesdales, and I only know the McCalls,
and those were the ones that left their properties to their children, and now we are in,
well, that's where I'm at with that. There's nothing wrong with those properties.
Okay. So I'm showing you now a copy of a form that the applicant, says Brian Watson, doing business as BJA Real Estate LLC, submitted to the RCO, the Strawberry Mansion CDC.
and i'm going to the second page and um it says it's uh the question is briefly describe the
intended structural adjustments and or additions to the property and it says the property is
already configured as a two-unit residential household this application is to legalize that
use no structural adjustments or additions are needed so um mr williams is are either or both
of those houses that we were talking about, 1819 and 1821, are either or both of those
already configured to be a duplex?
I have no way of knowing specifically, but from the outside and the times that I have
been in both of those houses with my neighbors, the only thing that I've seen had changed
in there is that they had made the property adjusted for people to age in place. Both of
Both of the homeowners there had gotten to the point that they couldn't get around.
the homeowners there had gotten to the point that they couldn't.
They moved.
They made bathrooms on the first floor.
I don't know about the upper floors, but they made adjustments in their home in order to be able to age in place.
That's all I know, and that's all I've seen in the times that I have been in there prior to the children having sold the property.
All right.
Now, have you been inside?
When was the last time you were inside 1819 North Nostromo?
I was inside that property just before Bunny left.
That's the son of the Tuesdales.
I was in his home in there because he had some minor problems himself and getting around.
He had had surgery with his eye and all those things.
So it was handy that he was able to utilize the property because of the bathroom downstairs and all those other things.
And so I was in the property. And the condition I've seen on there was, it wasn't looking like that, but it was livable. And that was up until less than a year or so ago.
All right. Let me address what the counsel for the developer said in his remarks, that you supposedly own a three-unit property and that you don't want anyone else to have one. How do you respond to that?
Well, when I moved on the property, the next door was three units. It wasn't not long after that, they moved out. Someone was in the process and it was just laid there.
It was a fire. There was a fire in that property. I got nervous because I'm a new neighbor. I just moved next door. I am next door to the property that we're talking about that is zoned as three units. And that was done back in 1956 or something like that.
But in dire fright of my property getting damaged somewhere down the line, I sought out the owners of that.
And through a process we went through, I did all I can to flood all of my savings and everything to be able to purchase that property in order to save my property.
I have not done anything with that property, but just try to keep it from being an eyesore to the neighborhood with some adjustments and all that, because I have no idea when and where I'm going to do with that property.
Hopefully, my grandchildren, my grandchildren, as a matter of fact, come in to visit me this weekend and her husband.
Hopefully, I can get those guys to be able to help me make a decision.
That property was purchased by me and my wife in 1997.
And it's still there. It's not an eyesore. And I've been through years out of pocket just trying to keep it looking decent so it doesn't bring down the rest of our neighborhood. And hopefully in the future, I'll be able to develop it in a way with my family that I'm living next door to. We will not be absentee landlords or absentees anybody. So go ahead.
thank you all right let's talk about the rco meeting uh you heard uh the council for the
developers say that there were a whole lot of people there who were supporting it not too many
opposing it um but there was some kind of a change with um the letter from the rco um tell us what
you saw when you were at the rco meeting and who was who did you who could you identify from the
block, and who did you not be able to identify? I am sure there are some people that is on
this Zoom meeting there from my block. And as it was described to me after the RSEO meeting,
was that, who are those people? If you take another look at the photos that was just presented,
our street is like a u-turn most people don't know that we're there and that's why we were
able to survive all of this time you come down burke street and you make a turn you have to
make another u-turn to come out of it no one ever ever comes down that street unless they're part of
the family they know somebody in the family and they're visiting and there's no other reason to
be there it's not a shortcut the place it's not a shortcut you just come in and you make a u-turn
and you're out. Now, the Moore Street that's on the other side of us is literally the alley for
Montgomery Avenue. They have no alley. The houses are backed up against the street.
Mr. Masters said, let's try to concentrate on this.
Mr. Williams, can you focus on the RCO meeting and what you saw happen and who you saw vote
which way we did not know those people from the from the graph that he showed the of us
We did not know those people from the from the graph that he showed the way they sent letters to a lot.
A lot of those houses are empty. No one's there is just nothing there.
We don't know who those folks are. And we know that we have put a petition together with all the names of the people on our block from 20 from 1821,
when they came before the zoning board before saying that we didn't want that.
We thought it was a done deal and it was over.
So these people, we don't know where they come from.
So from your observing the people on the Zoom for that meeting, did you know who the neighbors were on your block and how they voted?
Objection.
I recognize.
I will object to that.
Mr. Calvin is not the RCO.
He does not maintain the roster, and the roster is not in his possession.
He's already testified that he didn't know.
Mr. Masters, I agree with that, Mr. Masters.
All right.
Was there something about the Reverend Williams, the way he ran the meeting, that concerned you at that RCO meeting?
um how can i i've been to previous the rr so ceo meetings and the the the quorum and and and things
that were put in a place and established was uh great i i just don't know whether we had fair
opportunity for everyone to speak make this point and identify themselves as who they were and where
they were where they live and what the addresses were and and and and i again i'm saying i cannot
from where i was identify anybody from our block of nearest near neighbors
i i it's not for me to keep explaining this like this yeah yeah i mean i think we're starting to
repeat mr masters we're starting to repeat all right is there anything else that you wanted to
add mr williams i i just wanted to say that the opening lines again when you say the the tree
lined uh block was typical of of in philadelphia i want to say our neighbors uh together and work
with the uh the philadelphia horticulture society to have trees planted and every tree that's on
that block is implanted in front of our elder older neighbors homes every uh store front of
a house that has reflective addresses were put together by the block. Everyone that has a lamppost
that has a lamp on it was done by the folks on that block. We have been close together like that
and we're not asking anything unusual. We want to keep a single family units on there. If you build
it they will come period because we have two new neighbors that have mr mr top mr top and you want
to cross just a few questions um well well for first uh mr williams um it's good to to hear you
again you are you're you're very consistent in your advocacy for your block that's the kind of
advocacy that this board is is impressed by and i'm impressed by so but at the same time mr williams
I wanted to go over some of the things that you've said.
Number one, you did confirm that you own currently a three-unit building on that house on North
Metrona Street.
That's correct, right?
That's correct.
And have you rented that?
Is that a rental property?
No, never, ever.
Never, ever.
It's a vacant property as we speak.
That's what you're representing to the board today?
Yes, yes.
But you did not represent to the board that you intend on converting that to single family.
Is that what you intend to do?
I don't know what I want to do.
I have the prerogatives to do that.
But again, Mr. Williams, you're not saying to this board, and you didn't say in the RCO, so you're consistent there, that you intend to make sure that your own property is single family.
I'm going to object because there has nothing to do with this application.
and it's and it's harassing the witness okay hold on so i'll move on from that but
sherman want to move on to a different question i will yes yes so mr mr williams you did not
circulate a petition for an 1819 north natrona street on the block prior to this rco meeting
isn't that's correct that's correct we had already did one for the next door property
You did not do one since the meeting. After the vote was in the favor of the applicant, you did not circulate another as the block captain to show exactly what the support is. That's correct, right?
as the block captain to show exactly what the support is that's correct right no i did not do
that okay so after his rco meeting just looking at mr reverend williams is um his uh summary
there were five there were four people sorry four that opposed one of which was you um and you
recognize of course those people those are the people that you're referring to from the block
that are in support of you isn't that correct i i don't understand what you're asking me
the RCO meeting that you attended that we were all present for in that vote there were only four
that opposed this only application that we're here to talk about you were one of those four
so that means only four people from your block that you mentioned that you're the block captain
of appeared to vote in I'm objecting he he didn't testify he's the block captain now he said he was
in the past but he hasn't been the block captain for many years but i i i think i think the real
question is was there just four people from the block period yeah that's a better question that's
a better question okay i cannot really identify anyone but myself because the meeting progresses
no one signs in of who they are and where they live in the block and everyone did not have an
opportunity to be able to speak and so so i have no idea how other than breakdown than my well i
just that's that's it just no idea please yes okay great and now you are you know mr mr watson
mr captain miss williams i don't know her no i know i do not know him personally i know the
truesdales and i know the mccalls okay and um so as as you as you sit here today you you've referred
used the word we several times in your testimony um the we i imagine you're referring to are other
neighbors on north natrona street is that correct correct okay are are those we part of the four
people that opposed at the rco meeting no idea i have no idea okay or to your knowledge are there
people associated with this meeting hearing today that are waiting to testify because of your
advocacy i would hope so okay how many people do you think are in support of your position
mr williams when you refer to as we who are you referring to exactly i i can't i i can't explain
this to you unless you lived on the block where we live you saw it it's small it's not those many
houses we've all grown up that's my point that's we as family you know but you but you know them
all mr williams or do you do you not know them all i i know i know most of every single one of
my neighbors on it even some of the newer ones that have come to our block i've known i've reached
out to them i've reached out to them well mr williams you you've said again you've reached
out to the neighbors you you've mentioned that you are representing a we or a group
how many of this group are you actually representing today beside yourself
that's a in my mind of mine that's a crazy question i can't answer no no no no in the way
that i did you can't answer the question don't answer the question yes well i have no further
questions from miss williams i think it's clear thank you thank you very much um mr masters do
you have anyone else um i do not okay um questions or comments from the board
question was a uh summary sheet uh submitted uh from the meeting
yes yes miss gaston um that is the last exhibit on i'm actually on that let me share my screen once
again okay this is the summary sheet that is in front of you here as you can see the final
position taken and that and that would say how many attended yes 30 people were at the meeting
um 12 support four opposed five abstained and does it say um anything um i can't
it's a little small okay i'll make it i'll try to make it bigger here
It is not broken down in two critical ways.
It's not broken down.
Well, what it does state to, thankfully, it states that both RCOs, it says participating RCOs, and they list both of them.
So this is the count of both RCOs and the letter that is the consolidation of all people present.
And this is what you see.
Thank you.
And then with the, was there, and again.
uh was there and again there was then and there was a letter that was
attached yes and i'm going to move into that here here is the letter that is that's the initial
letter this is the initial letter it says as coordinating rco strawberry mansion cdc is
issuing this letter of support of the meeting held for the above reference preference uh reference
um property referenced above to family use and it goes into it and it did also say that
okay we so then the letter in opposition was there a summary uh form with that um i i don't
the vote count in what have you it's the there's they did not revise from my understanding the
letter of support of opposition that was issued yesterday simply sort of repackages some things
that mr williams has said about the neighborhood and and it presents no new vote count it's simply
a different letter with the same with because there was no new vote count and there was no
polling and there was no petition that would support a total change of position from one in
the 10 days that between you know yesterday and and the sixth so we're perplexed by what took place
and and who contacted mr williams and or and how and mr williams said that people did contact him
i'm not sure if mr williams was one of them um sorry there's two there's reverend williams i
should say so i don't know exactly what pressures he had but he felt so inclined to to reverse the
position which was perplexing to us um mr chair we we don't have we don't have a copy of the of
that second letter up and and i haven't seen it so i'm hoping that that someone can display that
the second one was signed by reverend williams yes yes so i think i'll make sure you get a copy
okay yeah you should you should have a copy since it was signed by your client and and i apologize
i do have a cop an email with it i didn't put it in this presentation i thought mr masters would be
putting it into perhaps his with with but he's recently engaged so
thank you um and and that's that's my questions thank you any other questions in the board
question has there been any um issue raised uh that there was an improper mailing or folks
weren't notified of the original rco leading there's there's always no one in the rco meeting
said that they did not receive the letter. In fact, everyone that was there did. We presented this. I don't just do the one page. I actually physically, personally do these certificates of mailing. So when they come out of our office, I mean, I have every letter that went out physically handed to. So I know they went out. It's not, you know, I presented this to Mr. Reverend Williams a week before 10 days or 11 or 12 days before the RCO meeting.
so there was no objection as to that
I don't think that was the issue
that was it
that was my question
questions from the board
questions or comments
from our attorney Hillary Emerson
not at this time
Mr. Chair
questions or comments from the virtual audience
yes Chair
I have a hand up by the name of
Whitney Blake they have been allowed to
could you please state your name and spell for the stenographer hi can you hear me i can hi good
morning my name is whitney lake do you need my first and last name spelled out please could you
please do that hi my name is whitney blake uh first name uh letter is w as in walter h as in
harry i as in igloo t as in tom n as in nancy e as in edward y as in yellow and my last name is
Blake. Last name B as in Boy, L as in Larry, A as in Apple, K as in Kevin, E as in Edward.
You swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth.
I do, sir.
Are you a neighbor?
Yes, sir.
Please proceed.
Hi, I am a resident of 1818 North Nutrona Street. I am directly across from both residences
that both Mr. Tippin and Mr. Watt are petitioning for. First of all, I want to say that Mr.
Mr. Calvin, Mr. Calvin, who I call him Mr. Calvin Daly,
he is one of the elders on our block
and I am one of the children.
One of the things that Brian Watson has brought up in previous meetings that we have had with the RCL and the zoning board and through the Starry Mansion meeting is the fact that he is a child of the block.
One of the things that Brian Watson has brought up
in previous meetings that we have had with them
I currently live on this block. I was raised on this block. I am currently 37 years old.
And I just want to refer back to the exhibit that Mr. Tiffin had shown on his screen a few minutes ago, stating those on the RCO board or those in the meeting that agreed upon this message that all those people, no, no, it says current resident.
If you want to go up, keep going.
And when I list all the addresses of those who attended the meeting, who approved the building, keep going, please.
Keep scrolling up, please.
scroll faster please so i can i want to make sure everybody can say what they want
so if you once he gets to there you'll see that a lot of the addresses listed are all of those
addresses are for current residents of other blocks i am a resident of 1800 metrona street
um and i want to say i have a few things my main concern and this has been exhausting overall from
those on my block, specifically for me because I live across the street, and I have heard the
barrage from both Mr. Watson and his previous counsel, along with the ethical practices. I
have concerns about from everyone on the petitioner's side regarding how they have
carried themselves from this meeting and prior meetings. During the last meeting, the petitioner
included individuals who voted in favor who are not residents of this block. I live here. I'm a
resident here. My mother owns the lot next. So him touting that, oh, Mr. Calvin owns a property.
I live here. We see the effects of building and property on our street. And I won't stand for it.
I question the intentions of why they're doing this. I question also the underhanded tactics.
Those who approve. Okay. So why don't, listen to me. So why don't, so you're against this project?
absolutely and mostly before the plea of reservation for excuse me for preservation
for this block a lot of what they're going to tell is that they went around about this the
right way they did not those who approve and he's still not showing it if you can scroll up there is
i don't i don't have that document yeah i don't have that document is on there if you scroll up
sherman sherman hold on hold up she's talking about your mailing oh oh i also want to say
that I'm a resident of this block
and not one letter was sent
to anyone. I did not receive it.
I work from home. I am home
all the time. Mail comes to me,
I bet, those right there, current residents,
33rd and Montgomery.
People who are not residents of this block are making
decisions for those who are on this block
and I don't appreciate that.
Listen,
that's where he mailed, that's where he mailed
to and I guess
the question,
Listen to me. We have other people want to testify. It's real clear where you stand with this. Am I correct?
Yes, I'm sorry. I apologize. I'm very passionate, and I don't appreciate how...
I understand. So we thank you very much. We understand where you stand.
Thank you.
I have a question for Sherman.
I just wanted to know if she intended the RCO meeting that we had, Ms. Blake.
i think she said she didn't receive the mailing oh okay no further questions
other hands tyrone williams has been allowed to speak good morning reverend williams please
state your name and spell for the stenographer good morning chairman bergman and the board
good morning to both attorneys and good morning to a one on the line my name is tyrone reverend
tyrone williams tyrone t-y-r-o-n-e williams w-i-l-l-i-a-m-s you swear or firm to tell
the truth the whole truth is nothing but the truth reverend yes i do please proceed okay uh first
off uh the letter that was up was for 3144 euclid it was not the letter for 1819 and he put that
letter up as evidence. So that is not the original
letter of support that I sent. That is for another
property. He presented on two properties that night, one of
them being 3144 Euclid. So that's the
letter. That is not the correct letter.
Secondly, our conversation, excuse me,
secondly, I never asked y'all to withdraw.
what our conversation was
because I was getting
so much
pushback from the nearby residents
who felt they were being ignored
I asked you to ask your
client would he consider
building a single family.
building a single family
and I said to you
And I said to you that it will sell
that it will
because Habitat for Humanity just did a huge project
around the corner with a bunch of single families
and they all sold.
You expressed to me that your client
wasn't interested in doing that.
And the clientele he was interested in it written to,
Section 8 and students and others.
And I explained to you that, you know,
the block has been the way it's been for years. Secondly, I want to talk about the 12 that voted.
Prior to voting, and anyone on this line can confirm this, I ask everyone to identify themselves
even through their phone numbers. I call out last numbers. I call out names. I try to make sure
everyone in the RCO meeting know who is on the line for transparency. I also, when I host these
meetings, ask for the nearby residents to have a say, and which they did. Thirdly, the reason for
the retraction is because I didn't do due diligence, and I will say that. I didn't go back
to my records for 1821 North Neutrona, which I believe I may have been the chair of that
meeting as well.
And the same pushback came at that time in 2023 because I looked through the paperwork
and checked everything out, including finding the letter for former Council President Darrell
call it. I spoke
with my boy
here at the CDC about
this because it was complexing to me
and I was, they
instructed on me what to do.
I will say
Toppin
did talk to me about
how is it fair that 12 people
could support it and
you not get it. Well, you have
five abstains
that didn't want to even bother with it and four opposed and the others that voted i can't tell you
where they came from because i don't have anything on zoom that told me anybody's address or give me
anything i go on people being honest while they're on the line identifying themselves saying who they
are so everyone in the meeting know who they is. The reason for the retraction is because we at
the CDC is supporting the nearby neighbors of that block because it's a block that can be easily
densified and we are currently dealing with that in Strawberry Mansion and we don't want to see
more density if we could prevent it. Thank you. Thank you Mr. Williams.
and sure sherman you have questions i think mr williams was very accurate in in how he conducted
the meeting was actually the rcu meeting was actually well conducted and that was notable
and but the issue still remains mr williams that only four raised their hand to oppose
in that meeting of a block of 28. four one of we're going to object that that's not a question
for cross-examination well well mr mr williams you but i yeah so so i think you can ask the
question if sure relative just four people on the paperwork so mr williams that that that is correct
what you indicated on as far as the vote count for in as far as directly opposing when you ask
for the vote that is correct isn't it that's correct but i also want to just uh bring miss
whitney's testimony to light and which she said did she did not even receive a letter of the
meeting and she is a current resident in the block and i don't know how many others may not
have received the letter and that well well what what is what is true mr williams and you know this
for a fact that calvin williams who is on the is the block captain and he was very job to mail
mr top and it's your job and i did to mail to all the current no ideas and the block and
and it's reverend reverend reverend reverend yes sir let's let's go back so the position
reverend williams so where you understand your position right now you're in opposition
we are in opposition correct does anybody else have another question for the reverend
I don't turn the world to your you're through. There's no, there's no thank you. Thank you.
Thank you, Reverend. Anyone else in the virtual audience? Yes, chair. I have three hands remaining.
Gwendolyn Blake has been allowed to speak
Gwendolyn Blake has been allowed to speak.
I could
Hi, could you please state your name and spell for the stenographer?
Hello.
Can you hear me?
Good morning.
I can.
Could you please state your name and spell for the stenographer?
My name is Gwendolyn Blake.
As G as in girl, W-E-N-D-O-L-Y-N.
Last name is Blake, B as in boy, L as in lake, A as in apple, K.
as in kite, ee, as in eel.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth,
nothing but the truth?
Are you a neighbor?
Yes, I am.
Are you in favor of this project or against?
I'm against.
Thank you very much for taking the time to call.
We appreciate it.
Next hand, please.
Clayton Brothers has been allowed to speak.
And could you please state your name and spell for the stenographer?
Clayton Brothers, C-L-A-Y-T-O-N-B-R-O-T-H-E-R-S.
Where are we affirmed to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Are you a neighbor?
I am a neighbor.
I'm from the neighborhood.
Yes, continue.
Are you in favor of this project or against?
I am in favor of the project.
I am a like-minded from the community born and raised.
I am an active realtor.
I am also an investor.
I have several properties that I do run out to lower-income families.
I do have several multi-units surrounding that I run out to lower-income families.
And I'm a person that's in the neighborhood, and I'm revitalizing the neighborhood so I can rent back to the neighborhood and not tease anybody out the neighborhood.
So thank you very much.
Thank you.
Does anyone have a question of Mr. Brothers?
Yes, Mr. Brothers.
Do you live on that block of Natrona Street?
When I asked that question before, he said he was in the neighborhood.
You have a question for me? I'm here.
Yeah. Do you live on the 1800 block of Natrona?
No, I don't live on the 1800 block of Natrona.
I live on the 2100 block of Stanley Street, born and raised.
Just answer the question.
Thank you. And, uh, next hand, please.
Calberry mentioned community concern has been allowed to speak.
Could you please state your name and spell for a court stenographer?
Never mind.
Next hand, please.
Can you hear me?
Yes. Could you please state your name and spell for the stenographer?
Yes. My name is Keith Smith.
I'm not a resident of Natrona, but I live directly across Natrona.
Hold on, hold on.
Could you please spell your name for the stenographer?
Keith Smith, K-E-I-T-H-S-M-I-T-H.
You swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
And you're a neighbor?
Yes, I am a neighbor.
I live on Euclid Street, directly across from Natrona Street.
I know many residents on Natrona Street.
All right, listen to me.
Are you for or against this crowd?
Thank you very much for taking the time to call us. We appreciate it. Is there anyone else in the audience?
Yes, Chair. I have six hands remaining. Strawberry Mansion Community Concerning has been allowed to speak.
Okay. Hi, could you please state your name and spell for the court sonographer?
Hi, good afternoon. My name is Bonita Cummings. B as in boy, O-N-I-T-A, C-U-M-M-I-N-G-S.
you swear or affirm you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the
truth i do i was in attendance wait a minute no no no listen to me listen to me listen to me
are you in favor of this project or against opposed thank you very much we got quite a few
other hands i have to get ahead of the of the affected rco she's one of the she's one of the
rcos i i think i know who she is i think i know miss cummings do you do you have anything you
want to add but we just got to get to quite a few other people i just wanted to add that again there
were three um meetings going on for that particular uh meeting many of the people voting
were people voting from as far away as 29th and Diamond.
There was some, even in my own process,
confusion around the vote
because it was difficult to really hone in
on the people directly affected,
which were the Natrona Street residents.
There were at least,
there was a household with three of our seniors in it
There was a household with three of our seniors in it that were voting from separate homes who may or may not have been counted, and that would increase that number.
that were voting from separate homes.
So it really may not have only been four.
So it's a block that did come out to oppose the position, and many of the votes came from far away.
Those 12 votes are not from people who are directly affected within that 250 feet of that particular address.
There were three locations going on.
So, Mrs. Cummings, I hear what the lawyer said.
Okay, I just wanted to add that.
I know.
I know.
I think that's important to know who remained on the call.
I understand, but I think what he's saying is you just can't figure out who was there and who was not there, although I know all the mailings.
Is there anything else you want to add?
no i think it's all pretty much been said thank you and thank you for taking the time to call we
appreciate next hand please timothy young has been allowed to speak hi could you please state
your name and spell for the stenographer timothy young please unmute yourself
could you please state your name and spell for the stenographer
Timothy Young, T-I-M-O-T-H-Y-Y-O-U-N-G.
Swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth.
Are you a neighbor?
Yes, I am.
Are you for this project or against?
I'm for it.
Thank you very much for calling.
We appreciate it.
Next hand, please.
Bria Rome has been allowed to speak.
Hi, could you please state your name and spell for the court stenographer?
Bria Rohn, B-R-I-A-R-H-O-N-E.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Are you a neighbor?
Are you for or against this project?
Thank you very much for taking the time to call us. We appreciate it. Next hand, please.
Chair, I currently have four hands remaining.
Cush Pettaway has been allowed to speak.
Hi, could you please state your name and spell for the court stenographer?
Hi, I'm Cush Pettaway, C-U-S-H-P-E-T-T-I-W-A-Y.
Where or firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Are you in favor of this project or against?
I'm in favor.
All right, and you're a neighbor?
Yes. I actually own the property that recently, well, a year ago, burnt down 1813 North North Carolina Street.
Thank you very much. We appreciate you taking time to calls. Next hand, please.
Erica Jones has been allowed to speak.
Could you please state your name and spell for the stenographer?
Good afternoon. My name is Erica Jones, E-R-I-K-A. Last name Jones, J-O-N-E-S.
You swear or firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Are you a neighbor?
Yes, I am.
Are you in favor of this
prosecutor or against?
I'm in favor.
Thank you very much for taking the time to call us.
We appreciate it. Next hand, please.
Stephanie Reynolds has been
allowed to speak.
Hi, could you please state your name and spell for the stenographer?
Never mind, Chair.
Ken Ellis has been allowed to speak.
Hi, could you please state your name
and spell for the stenographer?
can ellis please unmute yourself
next hand please hello hi could you please state your name and spell for the stenographer
my name is kenneth ellis k-e-n-n-e-t-h last name ellis e-l-l-i-s and i'm in favor of this project
all right do you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth
yes and your neighbor yes all right next hand please sure this is our last hand stephanie
has been allowed to speak i could you please state your name and spell for the court sonographer
hi my name is stephanie reynolds that's s-t-e-p-h-a-n-i-e-r-e-y-n-o-l-d-s
we're a firm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth yes um are you a neighbor
i'm a community member are you for or against this project i'm for the project
thank you very much for taking the time to close we appreciate it planning commission
Thank you, Chair Bergman, and good afternoon. David Fecto with the City Planning Commission.
thank you chair bergman and good afternoon david effecto with the city
Chairman and board members, the comprehensive plan recommends no change to the RSA-5 residential
single-family zoning at this location. The City changed the zoning maps in this neighborhood in
2014 in accord with recommendations in the comprehensive plan. At that time, this property
had been zoned single-family since 1967. In 1967, the zoning changed from R9, today's RM1,
residential multifamily, to RSA5. This property received a use variance and use permit for three
dwelling units in 1956. What we don't know is how long this property has been vacant.
As the board knows, after three years of vacancy, a previously approved variance may expire. We are
aware of other legally non-conforming duplexes and triplexes on this block face dating to the
1950s. However, the majority of the homes on this block face remain single-family. The City Planning
Commission recommends that the board deny the proposed use variance for two dwelling units.
So, Mr. Toppin, Mr. Masters, there's been a lot, obviously, a lot of testimony today relative to
this case. I'm going to take this to executive session next Wednesday. We will vote on it at
930 a.m. Okay. Yeah, thank you. Thank you. Thank you both for Mr. Masters. Please stay on.
Okay, I know I want to apologize to the board that the exhibit letter had 3122. It was an identical letter, but apparently, so I apologize. I understand. Thank you very much. Mr.
Okay. So, MI 2024-001-519-2128, Ridge Avenue. Mr. Masters is the attorney. Just state your name for the record, please.
Steve Masters, S-T-E-V-E-M-A-S-T-E-R-S.
Do you identify your client and the relationship to the product?
Yes, my client is Kikmak, LLC, K-I-K-I-M-A-C, and the principal is George Camu, G-E-O-R-P-E-K-A-M-A-U.
We have a letter of support from Brewerytown, Sharswood, seven in support for abstain. Do you stipulate to the reading of the refusal and agree with this accuracy?
Yes, I do. But I do want to do it. I will explain a bit about.
Oh, sure. Sure. Why don't you proceed?
all right uh screen get onto my screen
and all right we're going to start with
all right good afternoon now members of the board um steve masters for the applicant um
George Camo doing business as KICMAC LLC. So what we have today before you is a proposed
mixed-use project. First, there was a demolition. This is the property as it used to exist.
It was considerably bladed. It has been demolished. And what's proposed is to construct a new
structure with the first floor being commercial and then the upper floors being residential
apartment units. This would be a buy-write project if it was four units above the commercial
because it's a mixed-use zoning. But we are proposing six units, and I'll explain why
shortly. The only refusal is for the fifth and the sixth units. If the mixed income bonuses
applied to this property, we also would be by right even for the six units because of the
density bonus, because we are proposing that one of these six units will be low income,
affordable for a five-year period of time. But the mixed income bonuses don't apply to this portion
of North Philadelphia, so we're back to asking you for some variances.
Like I said, one of the six units will be designated as low-income affordable. We will
be recording an affordable covenant with the deed to that end and in order to economically create
this low-income affordable unit and what we are describing as naturally occurring
affordable housing for the rest of the five units because
affordable housing for the rest of the five units, because this location, as you'll see,
is saturated with PHA housing, and that has resulted in a natural depression of the market
rates for rents in this local area. So all of our rents will be considered affordable from the
moderate income area, but the community made very clear that they wanted at least one unit to be
affordable on the low income side. And so we went and agreed to that. So we'll just look at the
photos briefly. So as I said, this is what it used to look like from the front facade off of
ridge. This area used to be this pasture area, but there's a large multifamily big development
happening that I believe could be almost 80 or 100 units happening right next door.
This is across the street of our property. Again, it's mostly open space because of
so many of the properties have been demolished. This is the rear of the property. This is what
the blighted garage used to look like this is a new constructed building next door to our property
uh this is our rendering of what uh the property will look like from the from the
from ridge street facing the property uh this building uh is remaining we we we do not we do
not own that part um and then this is the rear uh the new rear of our property which used to have
blighted garage now has a very attractive uh brick and then uh and then a gray facade above
and this is the new construction next door to us um this is the side so over here is ridge back
here is beechwood and um this is no longer going to be like i said pasture uh and open space um
this will this is where but right here we wanted to show you where the receptacles will be for
for trash and recycling uh so now i'm going to go to um our rco support
uh our um coordinating rco is brewery town um sharswood and uh there was um unanimous support
from the community uh with without with there were some abstentions but everyone who voted
There were no votes against this project. In their letter, they appreciated that the developer is going to cap the rent of one unit at 30% of a tenant's income for the first five years.
They asked us for 10 years to use the 10-year tax abatement, but we explained to them in our presentation that the 10-year tax abatement is now really a five-year tax abatement because every year it steps down by a 10% point.
So we are using the savings from the 10-year tax abatement, but it really only amounts to five full years of being able to provide that affordable housing.
In addition, the community asked us to, well, let me just say the unit sizes, and I'll show you the plans in a moment.
The units are quite modest in terms of size.
um the the rent limits for um affordable uh for moderate income um housing according to the city's
um uh charts it would be one bedroom would be 1292 bedroom is 1548 um the rents that we are
anticipating are both below the the moderate income affordable rates um so that these are
are market rates and they're below the moderate income affordable rates. But as the community
pointed out to us, the moderate scale doesn't really jive with the level of poverty inside
Philadelphia. So we've gone below that for the single one. We also have a trash management plan
that we put together, we're going to have commercial trash pickup and recycling.
And we're going to provide information during the construction phase to all of the near
neighbors and, as I said, the single unit that's going to be affordable.
We did a whole presentation to the RCOs and the neighbors about the mixed income levels
and how to look at affordability and what was possible.
We also then created a community benefits agreement between Kikmak and Brewery Town Sharswood that...
between Kickmac and Brewery Town Starswood that primarily addresses the one affordable rental unit for the five years on the low-income aspect.
And we're using the language here that is used typically for city-created affordable rental unit properties.
This is not we we looked into getting some support from the housing trust fund.
We were told that wasn't possible for a private project.
So we're doing the best we can with the resources that we have.
We're also going to have we're going to record an affordability covenant with the Department of Records for this address so that it is it is completely accountable in terms of this this one set aside.
And BSCCA or its designee will have the right to conduct audits, like the city has the right to conduct audits for affordable units that are done through the land bank or the redevelopment authority.
We also are going to use best efforts to hire local folks during the construction phase.
And we're going to, like I said, have a local waste management company for the trash disposal and recycling.
blame. So now let's go to the plans. All right. So got to go this much smaller. Okay. So here's
our site plan. This is the rear beach wood. This is that side yard that we saw where the trash
reciprocals are going to be. This is the front onto ridge, so it's quite narrow at the front
and the rear and quite long on the sides. This is our rear elevation and our front elevation.
and these are these are additional views of the rear and the front elevations
the ground floor is going to be the commercial space we haven't determined which business so
it's it's going to be um momentarily vacant um and then um the the next floor up um the next
the two floors um uh above the commercial are basically have the identical uh floor plans which
is um two bedroom uh a two bedroom unit a um a one bedroom unit and then uh a two bedroom
unit. So the two-bedroom units are on each end, and the one-bedroom unit is in the middle.
And that's the same for the top floor. Two bedrooms, one bedroom, and then two bedrooms.
We also, in our packet, have our... Oh, sorry, we have the zoning posters.
um this these show the today's date for the hearing whoops
there we go you can see it's today and uh then we have the the the deed uh the uh application
for appeal the the project information form and our proof of mailing uh this is our we we did two
rounds of of community meetings so we mailed the first one with the proof of mailing and then we did
a we handed out a um a flyer door-to-door uh
there it is, to all the neighbors and to the businesses.
And we, it keeps popping up.
And these are all the addresses that we mail to and our proof of mailing.
At this time, I wanted to call on my client, I'm George Camo, to adopt my testimony.
and could you please state your name is spelled for the stenographer uh george come out g-e-o-r-g-e-k-a-m-a-u
you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth
yes i do please proceed counsel uh mr come out you um you heard my testimony
Please proceed, counsel.
Mr. Kamau, you heard my testimony this afternoon.
Do you agree with it and do you adopt it as your own?
Is there anything more that you wanted to add to the board at this point?
Questions from the board.
Can I see the floor plans again?
And can we make them a little bit bigger?
Let's see.
Also, while you're showing them, can you point out which is the unit that you were, that your client was intending to designate as affordable?
Sorry, let me.
I seem to have lost all my.
Okay, there it is.
Um, all right, so, plans 28.
um miss gaston did you want to see the actual floor plans the apartment floor plans yes the
floor plans thank you all right this is the commercial and then there is the floor plan
so this is the two-bedroom unit
that's designated as unit a and then unit b is a one-bedroom unit how many square feet
are we talking about here?
Unit A is 600 square feet.
Unit B is 385 square feet.
And Unit C is 582 square feet.
The floor above that's the same exact numbers?
And which unit is currently designated?
We have not designated a particular unit, but we anticipate it's going to be one of the two one-bedroom units.
So it'll either be unit D2 or, they're both listed as, so it's either going to be unit B or unit E.
Other questions from the board?
I have a question. Is there a delineation from the commercial trash and the residential trash?
Like what they have the storage, because if it's a commercial, maybe they perhaps they will have a dumpster, whereas apartment units may have trash cans.
So could you show that area? And what's the delineation from the commercial use on the first floor to the residential use on the upper floors?
um sure so the
this area and how would the residential units get access to the to have access to the trash
they all have access to the trash through um through a gate here um at the rear of the property
uh the the um the area for the for the um for the commercial um actually i'm going to ask for
my client to to clarify that because i i haven't had that question before
um mr camo can you come back um can you raise your hand again
George, Camille, please unmute yourself
The residents can access the trash through a door
If Steve, you could go down to the next page
I could show that
Yeah, right on that page right there
This is the commercial area
Right, right. So Doe 1, I don't know if you can see Doe 1 on that hallway. This is the intent.
Door one, I don't know if you can see door one on that hallway.
This is the intent is to be able to bring the trash out through the back because the community required asked that if we could put the trash in the back.
So the idea is to put the trash in the back.
As you can see from the picture that we have, we put the trash in the back.
So the commercial and the residential will be able to use the trash in the back.
And the community does not want us to use public, the city trash.
They want us to get commercial trash.
And so that is what we told the community we would do.
I have a few other questions.
One, is there a residential lobby?
And like, where is like mail storage, package drop off?
Is there a location for any of that?
Yes, so that will be by the entrance.
We haven't figured out how we'll put it on there, but, you know, everybody has to get mail, but it will be somewhere in the front.
In the front area here.
That front area.
Somewhere around this door at the edge of the property that leads to the stairs is the thought?
It won't be back there because there should be a door for security to make sure nobody can just walk in.
So somewhere in between there will be a door.
Okay, and then, can you explain why you chose to do six units instead of the four that are by right? One, I just want to point out, like, the units are a little small, especially the public, like, the living area and the public space areas. And so it does feel like it was a little bit squeezed into the building. And I'm just curious as to.
so like like steve said uh in in the community this community is largely owned by pha pha office
is right across the street so they go ahead oh i was gonna say yeah uh that that part i was aware
that was just trying to figure out why you were putting six units in this specific building so
So because PHA owns everything around that neighborhood, they have pushed down rent.
So you cannot charge $1,800 to live in that neighborhood because everybody else is paying $1,400 or $1,500.
So what that has done is has made it just a little harder to be able to make money out of having this building.
So to be able to build this building, so we would like to squeeze in an additional two buildings in there so maybe we could be able to make it financially possible and also to be able to give more space or more apartments to the community at a reasonable cost.
close at the temple they do have the three thousand dollar apartments but they're a little
bigger well putting a three thousand apartment in this part of the city will will basically
reduce the amount of people that can afford that kind of money so having you know having more space
and dividing the cost sounded like a good idea okay and then i know you said the community wanted
to see you to be affordable and you seem to be interested in sort of offering an affordable rent
to the neighborhood are you are you familiar with the concept of fair market rent uh yes okay um and
i'm just wondering like one the fair market rent for this area is 1200 which is set by hud which
is what governs the pha rents that you were sort of uh acknowledging um and did you consider any
other affordability program like did you section 8 like there's multiple other subsidy programs
that are available make units uh you know permanently or long-term affordable and did
you consider any of those uh yes we considered a lot of them uh section 8 um we use section
8 already so we don't have a problem with it we also try to talk to um um a few offices in
the city that could give us funding but most of them said they wouldn't do it for private so we
were looking for other options to reduce the cost of rent um whatever we could get but we are open
to taking pha vouchers and to do that the unit um as the community agreed uh to uh the 30 percent
okay but like currently there's no plans right now to try to get either vouchers on this building
or to advertise this as Section 8?
We haven't got to that point, but we are open to Section 8.
I do Section 8, and I'm open to Section 8.
And then, have you ever done marketing to tenants that live at 30% of AMI or below?
And then have you ever done marketing to tenants that live at their...
So, and or property managed?
So, at this point, no, but this is what we are putting on, this is what we're putting on the deed that we will do that going forward.
So the plan is to do a deed restriction through a separate agreement, obviously, is zoning. We can't provide that. But that is the agreement you've worked out with the RCO.
Yeah, we worked that out for a five-year period. We then went to the council member's office to see if we could extend it beyond the five years, but there didn't seem to be any way at this moment for a private project to be able to receive funding from the Housing Trust Fund or from other public sources.
So we're doing the best we can with what's available to us.
And did you consider the affordable housing density bonus?
Yeah, it's not available in this area.
Council President Clark put in an overlay some years ago and took away that option.
Could you tell me again how much space is in the commercial?
It's close to 1,700 square foot.
And your hardship is that you want to have this much density in this space because you want to provide affordability?
Yeah, our hardship is that the extra two units provide enough revenue to make the project work from an economic perspective and that we're basically preserving naturally occurring affordability for all of the six units because PHA suppresses the market rates.
But because of that, we need we need all six units because we can't we can't make a higher market rate for for a smaller for a smaller number of larger units that that wouldn't that wouldn't be sustainable economically for this particular location.
So we wanted to create an economically sustainable project that adds the extra units.
All around here, and I didn't have some of the photos, but when we went around with the leaflet to all the residents around there, there are massive projects happening with quite a bit of, like I said, 80, it looked like 80, 100 units that are going up.
We wanted to stay within the dimensions of the height and all of that, and in complying with all of that, we needed the extra two units.
And then we made one low-income affordable as long as we could, and we felt that that was doing the best we could for the community, and the community was very appreciative.
Yeah, and I hear that, but I guess my concern is that so much activity, because there is a commercial space that's going to be active on that first floor.
Do you have any idea of, are you shopping it around for types of businesses that could be on that first floor?
Because depending on that, that could possibly be a high traffic business as well.
Yes, that is so. Everything on that, on, on bridge is supposed to be a business, but at the time, that side of town is not very active.
So we're not sure what kind of business we can attract to come to that side of town.
And from the pictures you've seen, most of that place is vacant.
So we're not sure who we could be able to get up there.
Thank you.
Questions from our attorney, Hillary Emerson.
Not at this time, Mr. Chair.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
I see no hands at this time, Chair.
Planning Commission.
Thank you, Chairman.
Good afternoon, David Vecto with the City Planning Commission.
chairman, and board members. The comprehensive plan recommends no change to the CMX2 commercial
mixed use zoning at this location. The appellant seeks to build a vacant commercial space with
six dwelling units instead of the four that the code allows them to build. There is no unique
physical condition or circumstance of this property that will prevent it from being used
in strict conformity with the zoning code. We also note for the board that absent participation in a
city, state, or federal program, or a city zoning incentive, affordability mentioned in the
appellant's testimony cannot be enforced by any city agency. The City Planning Commission
The City Planning Commission recommends the board deny the proposed use variants for two additional dwelling units more than what the code allows.
recommends the Board deny the proposed use variance for two additional
MI 2024-001-519-2128 Ridge Avenue, I vote no.
Michael Johns, my vote is no.
Cheryl Gaston, my vote is no.
Senator Graham, my vote is no.
ION, my vote is no.
Thank you, counsel.
So, is there anyone in the virtual audience whose case has not been called?
I see no hands at this time, Chair.
All right.
Thank you, everyone.
See you everyone at 2 p.m.
Good afternoon, everyone.
My name is Bill Bergman, and I will be chairing this afternoon's meeting.
with me with me is our vice chair ismail shaheed president mr chairman our board member
cheryl l gaston president mr chairman our board member tenetta graham president mr chairman
our board member michael johns president mr chairman and our board member taya wynn
she's not on she'll be on any minute also present is our attorney hillary emerson
And our Executive Director, Ian Haggerty.
Here's our virtual format.
Proceedings are being recorded.
With your participation, you agree to be recorded.
The video will be available by contacting
ZBAExecutiveDirector at phillip.gov.
For a court sonographer, we ask attorneys and witnesses
to identify themselves before testifying.
If you're participating by phone,
press star 9 to raise your hand and star 6 to unmute.
To enter and appear in a statement, call 267-270-5548.
Leave your email address and the address of the property in question.
And finally, the question and answer box on the screen is not for testimony.
All questions should be directed to zbaexecutivedirector at phila.gov.
Let's look at our schedule for this afternoon.
Number one, MI 2023-006-919-2301 North 29th Street. I believe Darwin Bovee is in the audience for a continuance. Mr. Bovee?
Chair, I see no one by that name in the audience.
So, number one, MI 2023-006-919-2301 North 29th Street, case is continued, attorney moving party.
Number three, MI 2024-001-867-1112 Roy Street, that case is continued.
Number five, MI 2024-002-120-963 North Lawrence Street.
That case is continued.
And number 10, MI 2024-004-239-900 North 41st Street.
That case is continued.
Are there any other requests for continuance?
chair I see no hands at this time thank you so number six MI 2024-003-404-6915
North Broad Street Wayne Oliver is the listed owner we have no exhibits this is the second
listing the RCO is requesting it continues it's Mr. Oliver in the audience
Yes, Chair. Wayne Oliver has been allowed to speak. Wayne, please unmute yourself.
Chair, could you please state your name and spell for the court stenographer?
Wayne Oliver, please unmute yourself.
Okay, Terry, he's still on mute, he's still on mute.
Mr. Oliver.
Okay, so this particular case, the Oak Lane Community Action has tried to have a meeting.
They have not had a meeting as of yet.
So, number six, MI 2024-003-404-6915, North Broad Street.
Case is continued.
Mark must be heard.
We're going to go to our add-ons.
M.I. 2024-005-738-5200 South Broad Street.
I vote yes with proviso.
Her refusal dated 12-10-24.
Michael Johns, I vote yes with proviso.
Cheryl Gaston, my vote is yes, with Proviso.
Tanetta Graham, my vote is yes, with Proviso.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes, with Proviso.
Number two, MI 2024-006-182-231 East Rod Avenue.
I vote yes, with proviso. Change of use for first floor only.
Michael Johns, my vote is yes, with proviso.
Cheryl Gaston, my vote is yes, with proviso.
Teneda Graham, my vote is yes, with proviso.
Number three. MI 2024-004-300-3401-03 North 10th Street. I vote yes with proviso. Her amended
refusal dated 11-26-24.
My vote is yes with proviso.
Cheryl Gaston, my vote is yes with proviso.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes with proviso.
Thank you. We're going to go to our regular list.
Number two, MI 2024-001-649-7715 Ogons Avenue.
Alan Nockamson is the attorney.
This is a resumptive hearing.
Alan Nockamson has been promoted to penalist.
Thank you.
Hello, Mr. Nockamson, could you please state your name and spell for the court's amendment?
Yes, Alan Nockamson, A-L-A-N, the last name Nockamson, N-O-C-H-U-M-S-O-N.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
So, Mr. Nockamson, my understanding, this is a resumptive hearing.
Am I right? That is correct. I was not involved in the original.
I know. So you you were a result. This is a resumptive hearing.
And we know you did not represent the person the first time around.
What we would want to do is could you update us on what happened between the last meeting and this meeting?
My understanding is that we we had another community meeting where a vote was taken by the community group.
And, you know, we're here today to present, you know, the what happened, you know, at that community meeting, maybe explain a little better, you know, what we're asking for.
My understanding, too, is that the board is going to hold the vote because we need another.
We needed an amended refusal and now we're going to hold for a corrective refusal.
Is that correct?
That is correct.
My understanding that my client with former counsel applied for, as part of their application for vehicle, equipment, supplies, and sales and rentals.
And unfortunately, I don't think that the refusal reflects that.
So just to be extra cautious, we're just going to get a correct refusal.
So why don't you start, sir?
All right. Thank you very much.
Thank you.
All right. Here to present 7715 Ogons Ave. My client is 7715 Ogons Ave. LLC. And then the virtual audience is Gregory Tenna, its owner.
you know I actually drive down this a lot I you know play basketball down at Abington Friends so
I go down to Ogonz a lot so I see this property Ogonz Air Avenue is a commercial corridor
in Philadelphia and you know we're looking to essentially legalize this property
for personal vehicle repairs and maintenance in an existing structure which would include
the sale of tires. In addition, obviously, we're going to add that language about vehicle equipment,
supplies, and sales and rentals of that equipment. So during our presentation, we'll review the
notice of refusal. We did get correspondence from the 50 Democratic Award. We had a meeting with
them, and I think there's a misunderstanding of what we're trying to do or maybe the extent of
what we're trying to do but we so we my client circulated a very extensive petition of people
in the neighborhood and close by and you'll see that through by way of our petition and the map
that we created i personally think uh that i don't know why we're here um you'll see in the
refusal like that this property has had this use since 1990 originally as a temporary use and then
as a permanent use. So what happened was we eventually got violation notice for the use
that he's been, you know, that's been this use since 1990. So previous counsel just filed another
zoning permit application and we got this refusal. So I can't understand why we're here, but I,
you know, we did, you know, we, you know, we will embrace this process. But you'll see the license
that we have or other licenses that we have and use registration permits.
You know, this is not the first time our firm has handled the sale of tires before,
and similar uses have been approved by way of variance, and we have two examples that
our firm has recently done close by.
Maps of the area, photographs of the property, simple site plan, our RCO meeting notice along
with proof of mailing that notice, our application for appeal that we filed with the ZBA, the
deed to the property, showing that the applicant owns the property, and a certificate of tax
clearance. Again, at the conclusion of my presentation, I would ask that Greg virtually
raise his hand and be sworn in, and then we'll be available to answer any questions the board
may have about this matter. So notice of refusal. This is a CMX2 property. We're looking for use as
personal vehicle repair and maintenance in an existing structure, as stated before, which will
also include the sale of tires. We're going to correct the refusal just to add exactly what we
asked for. But if you look here, in 1990, the ZBA granted a variance for auto repair shop,
no body and fender work to include retail sale of tires. The proviso was it was a one-year
temporary variance. So what happened? The following year, on or about, the ZBA granted
a permanent variance for exactly that work. So I'm not sure why we're here today. And I think
the biggest issue here is the sale of tires, as you saw in the letter from the community.
So the community did, you know, it was not a well-attended meeting. You know, the RCO board
voted one in favor and three imposed. And all attending meeting attendees was one in favor
and four opposed. So it was not a well attended meeting. But they indicated that the community
had some concern about the sale of tires because of how they were being stored. So originally,
they were being stored essentially in like a temporary like storage apparatus, like
really a tractor trailer. And that gave grave concern to the neighbors. So my clients pivoted
and created, what's it called, these tire racks that were in the back of the building structure.
And that was, you know, thinking that was the compromise.
And the neighbors were still not happy with that.
They think that this is going to be a fire hazard.
And you'll see from the license that we have in terms of disposing of tires,
like it's regulated by the state.
So in addition to this process of getting zoning approval,
So in addition to this process of getting zoning approval, it's overseen by the state of how we store and dispose of tires.
It's overseen by the state.
So there's all these regulations that we need to comply with.
So if it's not a safe structure or way of storing tires, obviously, we're not going to get a renewal license.
But this use has been in existence for this property since 1990.
Again, I don't know why we're here, but that's almost 35 years.
So my client circulated a petition of nearby occupants of properties, and you can see it's pretty extensive here. So, I mean, both not just the owners of the commercial units, but owners of residential units nearby.
And then this is the backup of that petition of people who signed and where they're located.
Again, my client did it under previous counsel, so it's not something like you would see with us.
But again, it's pretty extensive.
And then the license, you can see here, we had a license that's as active as March 13th of 2024 for motor vehicle repair and retail mobile dispensing.
So not sure why we're here. And then we also have something from the Department of Environmental Protection regarding the license that we have for removing and storing tires in, you know, according to the state of Pennsylvania.
And then this is just the original use permit for the use that started in 1990.
And again, not out of character for this board to approve, like, you know, again, the sale and ultimate storage of tires.
We were here regarding 5421 Baltimore Avenue, which was a less commercial property than the one that we have here today.
And here's the zoning permit for it.
And then 1937 Harrison Street.
Again, this board approved the storage and sale of tires.
And there's no any permits for it.
And then maps of the area.
We are in a commercial corridor.
Ogons is a commercial corridor.
We do abut residential.
We're between 77th Avenue and 78th Avenue.
This is just an overview or an aerial view of our property.
But as you can see, this is where the original storage of the tires were indoors.
We've changed it up and we'll have other photographs.
But this was a former gas station that became an auto repair shop in 1990.
And as you can see, this is what it looks like.
This is, you know, something that's been there for 35 years.
So, different angles.
And this is where the tires are being stored.
All we did was remove, we didn't change anything else, but remove the temporary structure that was there that was upsetting the neighborhood.
And we added these racks instead, which we thought would be, you know, something a little bit more amenable.
I want to focus on one other thing.
There is an actual divide between the commercial here on Ogons and the residential on 78th Street.
So it's not like we're attached or any building structure is attached or anywhere near this commercial aspect.
Just going in terms of like any type of fire hazards or anything else, if there would be.
And then this is the property.
Again, we always go on Google Street View.
it's always helpful to see what properties look like over time. This is something we pulled from
Google Street View in 2011. So you can see it really hasn't changed much.
And then this is the zoning hearing posters.
And then this is Oguns to the right of the property,
to the left of the property. This is 78th Street or 78th Avenue to the right of the property.
until left of the property.
These are our plans and drawings.
All we do is a site plan.
We haven't changed anything up.
All we did was, again, focus on having these shelving for the tires themselves in the back.
Our RCO meeting notice, we met with the community on October 23rd at 7 p.m.
Proof of mailing of that notice is following to 93 addresses.
our application for appeal that my client previously filed along with the notice of refusal
and the project information form, the deed to the property showing that the applicant owns the
property, and the certificate of tax clearance. The only reason why he says the balance due is
And the certificate of tax clearance. The only reason why he says the balance due is because of taxes that are not yet due in 2025.
I would ask that that Greg virtually raise his hand and be sworn in.
Gregory Tena has been allowed to speak.
Could you please state your name and spell for the court stenographer?
gregory tena spelled g-r-e-g-o-r-y last name t-e-n-a
where are affirmed to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth
yes sir proceed counsel oh yes uh gregory um you heard everything i had to state today about
or a zoning matter. Yes. And is it true and correct? Yes. And do you adopt this your own
testimony? Yes. All right. Thank you. Alan, I'm going to give it to the board, but I'm going to
start off by saying that there was a lot of concern about how the tires being stored outside
because the houses are right across that driveway. There's not a long driveway. And I think,
I don't know if you looked at any of the paperwork from the last one, but there's someone who had called in and talked about saying that we should recommend that the tires be stored inside.
And I think a lot of that for safety reasons, this person and this person does a lot of work down around southwest Philadelphia where there's a lot of places like that.
So I'm not sure how this case got here, but when it came here, there are the issues that people were concerned about, how close the tires are being stored to the house across the street.
So I'll start that off and I'll let you respond real quick, but then I'm going to give it to the board.
Yeah, I mean, again, I haven't measured it, but if you look at the aerial view, it's like a, it looks like a Lisa, let me show you, share my screen again.
I think we saw that, but go ahead. Why don't you do it again?
Yeah. Well, I think you saw it, but it's a pretty wide driveway.
And again, this is how it was done for the last 35 years.
And I don't know how we got here because the sale of tires has been a permanent use of this property since 1990.
So and there's been no incident since which would say that this is this is a problem to store the tires the way we have been storing it for almost 35 years.
So I guess it looked to me like the RCO wasn't crazy about it, right?
Oh, no, they were not happy about it.
But again, this this board on two separate occasions, one in 1990 and one in 1992 approved this use.
i mean really sure i understand no if anything i think this is more like an lni appeal i don't
know why we received a refusal again i took over this case but like i understand i understand
yeah it's crazy i don't know what happened and i again it's it's you know something i took over but
it seems to me like we shouldn't even be here because we already have a zoning permanent record
as of 1992, which is permanent in nature.
And we're not extending the use, sorry.
Questions from the board.
Okay, questions or comments from our attorney,
Hillary Emerson.
Just briefly, Mr. Chair,
I think just to clarify Mr. Nockmson's question,
I believe there was testimony at the prior hearing
that this property had been vacant for some time.
And since the previous approvals were granted by variants, they were probably lost due to abandonment.
So that's probably why Al and I are saying that a new approval is needed for the use.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
Yes, Chair. I have someone up by the name. I have a hand up by the name of Aze. They have been allowed to speak.
Could you please state your name and spell for the stenographer?
Please unmute yourself.
We see his hand.
They are currently still on mute.
Is there anyone else in the audience?
I see no hands at this time, Chair.
Do we have his name?
The person with the hand up?
it was as a
It was Ed A.
is his hand down
yes chair the hearing is currently down
okay okay planning commission
good morning afternoon amy boyd with the planning commission
amy boyd you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth
i do please proceed the comprehensive plan recommends no change
to the CMX2 commercial mixed-use zoning at this location.
The proposed use as personal vehicle repair and maintenance
is consistent with documented fire use.
The Planning Commission recommends that the board grant the requested variance
for personal vehicle repair and maintenance
and grant the requested variance for tire sales
with proviso interior storage of tires.
So, Alan, as we talked, we're going to hold it for a corrective refusal,
but other than that, it's closed.
Thank you.
Thank you.
All right.
Number four.
Mr. Chair, before we move on, I believe Mr. Anastasio has an additional request for continuance on the two o'clock list.
Mr. Anastasio.
Thank you, Ms. Emerson.
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I've already been sworn to just what case?
1427 West Diamond Street.
I think that was a system issue.
I kept raising my hand, but it kept getting lowered for some reason.
So my apologies.
That's number 11, Mr. Chair.
Yeah, I got it. MI 2024-004-374-1427 Diamond Street. Cases continue. Thanks for calling in.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you, Ms. Emerson.
And Mr. Chair, we also have a hand from Darwin Bouvet. It may be related to another continuance.
Probably his first case I called, right?
It may be.
Mr. Bouvet.
Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman, members of the board.
Would you please state your name and spell for stenographer?
Gladly.
First name Darwin, D-A-R-W-I-N.
Last name Beauvais, B-E-A-U-V, as in victory, A-I-S, as in Sam.
You swear we're firm to tell the truth, to hold truth in nothing but the truth?
I called your case earlier, and I continued it.
2301 North 29th?
Actually, I just uploaded a letter to withdraw the matter.
So if that could be more.
I'll do it right now.
Thank you very much.
And then also, Mr. Chairman, I have another issue.
We have a matter, it's 8301 Toursdale Avenue, and we have, it started off with a refusal, but now the matter is as of right.
And we've been trying to get that listed as a withdrawal.
So I don't know if this could be an add-on and we can have this withdrawn as of record because we want to avoid any delays with the application because it's been pending with L&I for several weeks now.
and mr bouvet this is hillary is that we don't have that the 80 well is the 8301 toursdale case
you're referring to is that on the the 330 list this afternoon uh that's the same address but
it's a different application it's a different application okay um no reach um reach out to
the office with a letter regarding withdrawal and we'll take care of that for the other
toursdale matter all right because i just did that so thank you okay yeah you just got it so
So it will be, yeah, you just sent that in.
It will be processed.
All right.
Thank you.
So 29th Street's just a continuance, not a withdrawal?
No, 29th Street is a withdrawal.
Thank you very much.
So MI2023-006-919-2301-29th Street, that case has been withdrawn.
Number four, MI 2024-001-872-260 Geiger Street.
Jason Kirk is the attorney.
There's a letter of opposition, letter of opposition from Greater Busselton Civic Association.
Vote was 27 in opposition, two in support.
good morning good afternoon sorry good afternoon counsel could you please state your name and
Good afternoon. Counsel, could you please state your name and spell for the court stenographer?
spell for the court sonographer yes
Yes, Justin Crick, J-U-S-T-I-N-K-R-I-K.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, told truth, nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Please proceed. I'm sorry I interrupted you.
No, I was going to say my address is 1515 Market Street, Suite 1200, Philadelphia PA 19102. Thank you.
Could you identify your client and relationship to the property?
Yes, my client is Dasha Hadar. She is the applicant here seeking to open up the child care center, and she is on the line.
Our vice chair has a few questions.
Good afternoon, counsel. Do you agree to wait to read another refusal or stipulate to its accuracy?
Have you emailed in all the required documents and exhibits as needed and required to proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing?
I have.
Thank you, council. Please proceed and share your screen.
Thank you.
All right. Thank you. Members of the board, we are here on this application at 260 Geiger Road for specifically Unit B.
This is a portion of a larger property that is situated in Northeast Philadelphia and in the Greater Busselton Civic League's RCO purview.
The applicant is a tenant in this building.
The building is zoned industrial, and this use as a child care center would be a change
to a commercial use for this portion of the building.
And because a child care center and commercial use is prohibited in this district, we received
a refusal.
The property itself has several other uses that have already been approved, including
an adult daycare facility.
and there is, I guess, I believe an ambulance facility in the rear of the building. It's a
fairly large industrial building. But what you should know about this child care center is that
this is not a typical nine to five or even eight to six child care center. Really, there was no
smaller or, I guess, reduced category allowed for something like this, but this is really aftercare.
The hours of operations of this would be limited from 2.30 p.m. to 6 p.m.
The size of the space, which I'll show you in a moment, is about a thousand square feet.
It's really just a place for parents of students ages 5 to 12 years old to really utilize some aftercare coverage at the end of the day.
So as I mentioned, the property's in the Northeast.
Geiger Road is located at the corner of Global and Geiger, which is off of Red Lion Road in a primarily industrial park, which you'll see from this zoning photo.
Our property is located right here, and it is adjacent to several residential properties.
The photos that will come up will show you that there's a nice buffer here of trees and such, and that the industrial or the building in commercial use would be up front.
just for a little bit more geographic, here's Montgomery County and Red Lion Road. This is
the old bud plant that has enough controversy behind it with the area, but we are situated
right here. And as you can see, residential and quite a lot of industrial, but there is a lot of
commercial that's already been approved in this area, including within this building itself.
As a closeup, I can show you that again, there's a buffer here, but this corner of the building,
which I'm circling here, and this pathway are really all that this aftercare intends to use
in the building. This is the entrance area for the aftercare, and there's a small space
along this corner of the building that would just be used for the aftercare.
As you can see, there's a lot of open street here, and that comes into play when you talk about
pickup and drop-off, because the hours are limited, and the students generally get there
by either some other form of transportation through their primary school or maybe a drop-off,
it's a transient situation where you don't have people consistently all day long coming and going
through. Employees will have access to parking in this lot along with some of the other tenants,
and the entire front portion of this building is an adult daycare at this point and was approved
several years ago. Before I, I'm going to jump ahead a little bit just to show you the front
of the building. You'll see active life services. This operates the majority of the front of the
building. And this is the, the posting on the front of this building and the entrance that
we would be seeking to use. So Ms. Hadar had worked with the landlord to try and set up the
space. This was done a long time ago, and unfortunately, we haven't been able to utilize,
we haven't been able to utilize, but this is the intent of aftercare. This is for parents to
but this is the intent of aftercare.
have their kids with maybe a prepared food already or snacks. There is no hot foods to be
cooked or anything like that. It's really a space for the kids to occupy their time as opposed to
being elsewhere that could be somewhat dangerous or undesirable during those after hours.
So it is only this unit B, which is, again, 1,030 square feet. We have approximately capacity for between 12 and 20 students. And what I wanted to point out a little bit earlier is that the area itself, even though it is industrial, there are three full-fledged educational centers within this just horseshoe of a street.
We have the Redline Elementary School, which is a private school, pre-K through fifth grade, that has a full curriculum. It is state licensed. They do serve fresh foods, hot meals, and they've been in there for over a decade plus.
Two doors down even further, we have the Grow and Learn Education Center, which is essentially,
it looks like the hours of operation are between 8 a.m. and 6 p.m., and they, too, have a full
contingent of students way, way greater than what we're looking at in an aftercare facility.
And then finally, the primary educational facility in this area is the Bambi Educational
Daycare. They've been here for about 30 years. I do know that a lot of traffic around some of
these is occurring, but they have significantly higher attendance rates during their operations
and significantly longer operational hours, a lot of which is during that peak morning time of day.
The owner is, as I said, a tenant of the property. They stepped in here and tried to do this earlier
in the year and get it going, but they are there for the long haul. The taxes have been paid on
the property and we did meet with the Greater Busselton Civic League. We did get opposition
from the Greater Busselton Civic League. I don't quite understand all of the opposition that was
there, especially given the fact that there's active adult daycare has already been allowed
and several other schools are located in this industrial district, which leads me to the
hardship in that we are looking for a consistency in the area so that we are treated identically to
some of these other applications that have been allowed. And we feel that this is the minimum
variance going from an industrial to a commercial use that is also in the purpose and spirit of the
code and plan because so many variances have been given recognizing that this area is not the
greatest uh or it hasn't been in the past for industrial uses so now the building itself has
been allowed to go into this industrial commercial mixed use which creates slightly greater hardship
on on the use to um you know because its characteristics have already allowed it to have
commercial uses in there um it's it's impossible to be in strict conformity of the code at this
point in an industrial area. This project does not increase congestion in the streets or endanger
the public. And that is because, again, it's a very limited use. We're not talking about a full-time
school in this space. We don't anticipate any impact to neighboring properties.
Unfortunately, I do believe the owner and some of the adjacent neighboring properties,
the residential ones, are having a dispute, but it is not related to the applicant's use,
and it is not related to the portion of the building that the applicants are seeking to
operate out of. There would be no burden on the public facilities or utilities here. It's a
nominal amount of people using, no different than would be if an industrial use were likely allowed
there, probably less. And there is no environmental concern with this project. There's no impact on
the environment or the land at all. So given that these uses have been allowed throughout the
industrial, we'll call it neighborhood street, as well as specifically within this building,
we believe that that is the hardship and that there's only, you know, it would be necessary
to allow this to enable this applicant to have a financially viable economic use in this space.
I do, again, have Ms. Hadar.
Council, can I ask a question?
Yes, please.
Did you attend the meeting?
I did.
And what was the conversations?
So a lot of the conversation is that people had problems with, at least as I, let me go back to it.
at least as I, let me go back to it. People had a lot of problems with this daycare specifically
People had a lot of problems with this day.
saying that it caused a lot of traffic in the area. And so they were concerned more about a
lot of the traffic in the area. And again, I think some of it was dealing with some of the
neighbors in the back. I don't want to tie it to that, but I do know that there is a dispute over
some of this land that raised concerns with people saying that this landlord having problems with the
landlord or the owner, I should say, versus the applicant itself. The neighborhood didn't
necessarily see the need for this, but I don't know that that's, you know, I didn't know how
to answer that because my client has obviously, you know, done her homework as to why she would
want to open this up at this location. So, I mean, those were the primary concerns was the
traffic from other daycares or schools that say that they weren't going to be, but now they're
full-time uh we are okay with limiting the hours of operation to an aftercare facility because
that's what this is so that it doesn't get uh for unit b so that it doesn't cause the neighborhood
more uh traffic congestion but again i did not necessarily understand other than a gripe with
commercial things popping up here and there uh any substantive reason why this would be a a
detriment to the neighborhood okay why don't you bring your client one um i do want to add that
that Ms. Hadar is, she has a bachelor's degree in physical education. She taught phys ed for four
years and she has had about six plus years experience in the daycare and educational
sphere. So she is not without experience and she's just trying to offer this up for people
as a service. With that, I will ask Ms. Hadar to raise her hand, to be unmuted.
tasha the door has been allowed to speak could you please state your name and spell for the
stenographer my name is daria heder d-a-r-i-a last name heder h-a-y-d-a-r you swear or affirm
to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth yeah i do please proceed counsel
Thank you. Ms. Haydard, did you have a chance to hear my testimony made to the board today?
Yes. Yes.
Was it true and correct to the best of your knowledge?
And would you adopt my testimony as if it were your own?
Thank you.
Questions from the board?
I have any questions.
Yes, I do.
How are the children going to get from wherever they are to this facility?
So my understanding of many aftercare is that some schools do have buses that will transport students to certain locations.
They also may get dropped off or, quite frankly, one of them, I doubt there are the elementary schools in this area.
But there may be people that get dropped off by another method or a family member for those after hours.
Ms. Hadar, if you have any insight into how or what, you know, the method you expect for them to be attending or how they intend to get there, please share.
But you two, the special parents or family members are going to bring kids.
some of the kids
are going to be
dropped off by parents
or family members
I believe we're going to provide
transportation
in the future
you're going to
provide transportation
from where these kids are
to get to this facility
is that what you're saying there again i apologize and that does refresh some of my thinking and
prior conversations i would have answered that directly before but uh my client can still answer
but i do believe that pickup from certain locations is something that they that she is looking to do
with some of the families as well so that there would be pickup from their primary school uh for
certain people i don't know that that's plans been enacted yet but other than again like i said
certain schools will drop students off at potentially uh specific locations or nearby
and i do want to state for the board that i do believe miss hadar's husband is with her
he is you know assisting but if i don't believe he'll be testifying okay i mean because what
you're saying is these are kids from 5 to 12 years old right yes and that the after school
program here is going to be from 2 30 to 6 p.m so if the idea
So if the idea is that these children need some place to go after school, the question is, how do they get to this place?
And you're saying the family members are going to.
well what i'm saying is it's either the the district itself can sometimes provide assistance
uh miss hadar has indicated that she may do some of that with her business or try to
accommodate make arrangements but there there i assume there are some times where parents
are able to maybe get the child or you make arrangements to get the child to the aftercare
so that the another primary caregiver or something can finish off their day at work
I think there's a mix mix match of ways that students could get there or children to get there.
All right. Okay, thank you. I have a question. Yeah, I have a question. So was the RCO during
the RCO meeting was the RCO given this model of just aftercare? Or, you know, do they think it
was just going to be like a full fledged daycare? They were given just the aftercare model, they did
have concern about, well, then it spills over into this and then you, you know, you extend for this
and get longer hours and so on and so forth. And I understand that that is always a concern of
neighborhoods about the representations made to them, but that is why we're okay with provisos
and other things that can be enforced to restrain the use and the times and so forth.
Did you, did you offer some of the provisos, possibly the forcible provisos during the
meeting to the RCO? Yes. This meeting did happen several months ago. We had attempted to meet with
them again in hopes of gathering more data about the other educational centers in the area. But we
were unable to meet with them again because they had already voted. And since it wasn't an amended
application, they didn't feel that a second meeting was necessary, which is fine. But we did
say that we would be willing to allow these provisos. We will limit it. We'll make the
representations and we'll abide by them so that they're enforceable.
Thank you.
Questions should that work?
Yeah, just I guess I have a comment.
I'm kind of don't see the argument,
I guess, that some folks from the community had about issues around traffic.
There are a couple schools already there, so I don't I don't see why that would be an issue.
I just wanted to go on the record to say that I don't see traffic as an issue for this project.
Anyone else on the board?
Questions or comments from our attorney, Hillary Emerson?
Not at this time, Mr. Chair.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
Yes, Chair. I have a hand up by the name of Jack O'Hara.
They have been allowed to speak.
good afternoon mr hara good afternoon chairman bergen could you could you please uh state your
name and spell for the court's sonography certainly jack o'hara o apostrophe h-a-r-a
you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth
i do please proceed sir uh the issue uh mr kirk uh brought up about uh a dispute with the owner
of the property uh that does exist that did not come into play with the decision uh to oppose this
uh there there is a resident like mr kirk said there's a uh residential neighborhood right behind
it there's now an eight foot high fence uh that runs along that uh that boundary uh and there is
traffic on red line road that was not also uh something that was uh a bother bothersome uh it
is uh there's two other uh daycares on on that strip and the neighbors uh feel like that was a
mistake allowing those in there are kids outside making a lot of noise as kids do as they're
expected to. But it's right outside their door now. And that did not occur in the past.
This is another daycare. And Mr. Kirk, I believe your client said that that was those hours were
going to expand in the future. So these, you know, this limited schedule is not something
we were thinking of, but the reason for the opposition is really the amount of activity,
more activity, that's backed up right to these houses. They're not big yards.
that's backed up right to these houses. They're not big yards. These properties go right up to
their border. And there's a lot of activity and noise that comes out of them. So that was really
the amount. There is, you know, some congestion. They're going to have, you know, UPS warehouses
planned for right across the street, directly across the street from the Bambi. So it is a
concerned, but that did not come into play here for the opposition. Mr. Kirk, do you have any
questions? I don't have questions. No, I just, I'd like to direct the board that this is the
buffer zone that we're talking about between this property and the residentials behind and unit B
is right up front here. And the other daycares, as you'll see, this is the, this is one and this
is another. And then the Bambi daycare would be up lower on the screen, which I don't have in
this picture but i i don't have any further questions i just would like the the board to
know that the issues that i think uh mr o'hara we're talking about deal with this this area of
the yards as well one other quick question how many how many people can you hold in there
how many you have uh between 12 and 20 uh occupancy based on the thousand square feet
thank you mr o'hara yeah you may i add mr uh chairman bergman may i add
The buffer that Mr. Kirk is referring to, a lot of that has been thinned or removed.
So that isn't as big of a buffer as it appears in the image there.
Thank you.
Wait a minute.
Chair, can we keep this picture up?
So where's the outdoor space for this daycare?
Is there outdoor spaces you can show us on this photo?
So the entrance is right where my hand is, and this is the front area. There's no intention of letting the students between 2.30 and 6 running around outside. I mean, that's not, this isn't a full daycare facility.
as you would have here's the red lion elementary which has a yard and then you have the uh the
what's when is this this is the uh the grow and learn center is right here so they they that's
different when you're talking about kids out at recess or something like that there's no intention
to allow the students to be running freely on the lawn out front which you know looks like this
that's all the the other question would be is
so there's no no issue of sending them outside am i correct correct that's they're not they're
not and then the idea i guess the other thing would be is the issue of enlarging the time
right i mean if it's an after-school program we gotta wait for kids to come out of school right
so tell me about that i mean mr o'hara raised the issue about your client said
she's going to change the hours? Not to my knowledge. I mean, if the intent is that this
is a 2.30 to 6 p.m. opportunity for students. And I guess here's where I think I'm thinking
about it. There was talk, well, the student after care, after school care, what does that mean for
summertime? And I think that the answer to that is that there's also after camp. It's the idea of
that hourly window being available for parents to use or guardians to use to to so that's the
only thing i can think of in that sense okay thank you anyone else in the virtual audience
i see no more hands at this time to you planning commission
amy boyd with the planning commission the comprehensive plan recommends no change in
the I-2 general industrial zoning at this location. There is no unique physical circumstance or
condition of the property that would prevent it from being used in conformance with the zoning
code. This is a continuous and viable industrial area and that the city has interest in maintaining
as a industrial area as seen in the recent approval of the 1 million square foot UPS
warehouse to be located at one line road within less than a quarter mile of the site.
The Planning Commission recommends that the Board deny the requested variants for use as a daycare center.
MI 2024-001-872-260 Geiger Road. I vote yes with proviso. Use limited to space B. Hours of operation 2.30 to 6 p.m.
Michael Johns, my vote is yes with proviso.
Cheryl Gaston, my vote is yes with proviso.
Senator Graham, my vote is yes with Proviso.
Iowyn, my vote is yes with Proviso.
Tishmel Shaheed, my vote is yes with Proviso.
Thank you, counsel.
Thank you, members of the board.
Number seven, MI 2024-003-727-535-Ruin Street.
535 Rowan Street, David Orphanides is the attorney.
David Orfanides is the attorney.
There's a letter of support from Fox Chase Civic Association and a letter of support from Council Member O'Neill.
David Orphanides will be rejoining us as a panelist.
Hello.
Good afternoon, Council.
Good afternoon.
Would you please state your name and spell for the court's sonographer?
Certainly. My name is David Orphanides. The last name is spelled O-R-P-H-A-N-I-D-E-S.
We're affirmed to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
I do, sir.
Could you identify your client in a relationship to this property?
Certainly. My client is St. Celia Catholic Church, and the property is 535 Bronze Street,
which is the church and a number of other buildings that include a school and the gymnasium and things related.
Our vice chair has a few questions, sir.
Good afternoon, counsel. Do you agree to wait to read another refusal or stipulate to its accuracy?
The refusals are correct. The description of the project is not correct.
As a result, I've been trying to work with the zoning plan examiner for a number of months now
to try to resolve the issue to determine whether or not the refusal could be just corrected by him
or done with handled with the revised proviso plan form in front of the board or required an amended
application. I haven't been able to do that, make that determination with him yet. So I would ask
that this matter be heard, but that the vote be held until maybe Hillary can assist. But right now
there are some things in the notice of refusal, mainly regarding the description. I think the
refusals are all correct but the um the way that they're worded but the description isn't quite
complete of the application understood have you emailed in all the required documents and
exhibits as needed and required to proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing
we emailed everything uh we were having problems with the tax clearance um obviously with it being
the church um there was an issue um i mean it's non-profit and it doesn't uh it doesn't get taxed
but often we can still get a clearance
and we weren't able to get that.
So I wasn't able to provide that five days in advance.
And then apparently the photos did not go through
and I'll forward those.
I have those to present today of the property
and of the posting and I'll forward those,
upload those to the system after the hearing today.
Understood.
All right, please proceed and share your screen.
And if we just, are we gonna continue chair with this
and just hold the vote?
Hillary wanna hold the vote on this, am I right?
Yeah, we'll we'll have Mr.
If you need to explain the project, as he said, the refusals are should be correct.
It's just that the description is incorrect and may need to be adjusted so we can address that afterwards.
And just to be clear, the plans, the revised plans are the plans that were presented to Fox Chase and that they based their support upon.
So just wanted to clarify that.
OK, thank you.
Can you all see my screen?
We can. Great. So let me just minimize this up here. Okay. So again, my name is David Orfanides with the law firm of Orfanides & Toner. The property in question is 535 Rohn Street. 535 Rohn Street runs through to the rear of it. It's on effectively the north side of Rohn Street.
And you can see that here with our aerial photos, you can see right here, here's the property.
So you have Rohn Street, you have the church, and as I mentioned, there's public library, which is not part of the property, here at Jeans and Rohn.
The property goes through to Stanwood and then goes through to Jeans.
At the present time, there is a freestanding, you'll see in a minute with the photographs, there is a single-sided freestanding sign by the church.
And then there is an existing wall sign over here on the side of the building that's located along Jean Street.
The zoning archives don't include any reference to this particular sign, the wall sign, which I'll show you photographs of.
So this application should be clear, and that wasn't clear in the way that the notice of refusal was worded as far as what the application was for, should have stated that it was to document this existing sign just, you know, while we're here dealing with everything else to make everything else legitimate and legal.
but in the end there's there's right now there's two these two existing signs freestanding and a
wall sign and then what you'll see as we go through is the idea the proposal is to take
And then what you'll see as we go through is the idea, the proposal is to take this freestanding sign and mount it to the same wall that the existing wall sign is along Jean Street.
this freestanding sign
One of the issues there, again, was that the notice of refusal did not indicate that that sign and, you know, is it necessary?
You know, I like to, as you know, I like to be very specific and to be clear so everybody knows what's going on, particularly when it comes to illumination and how neighbors feel about that.
So the existing freestanding sign is internal as internal static elimination.
And that will remain when it's if this is approved and it's moved to the wall of the building over here on jeans.
And then what you'll see as we go along in the local general location where the existing sign is here by the church on Ron Street.
The proposal is a double sided freestanding sign, a portion of which is a digital sign.
It's a 16 square foot on each side, two feet by eight feet, which, again, the way it's worded, it makes it sound as if the description and the refusal, as you'll see, makes it sound as if the whole double-sided freestanding sign is, well, they called it a message board, which isn't even a type of sign in the zoning code.
So that was something that I was trying to address.
But only a portion of the sign is digital, and we'll go through that in a minute.
So just a couple more aerials here showing kind of the three locations for the three signs that are going to be included with the application when all is said and done.
You go around.
You have the Fox Chase train station over at this location.
You'll see later on, there's an existing freestanding sign that's already been permitted right around in this location by the train station, right by Councilman O'Neill's office there for American Heritage.
It's fairly similar to what we're talking about here.
There's a freestanding sign a little further down the road for recurrence meets.
That is also in close proximity, but we'll go through that in a couple of minutes and I'll show you.
Some photographs. Here is the existing sign that I mentioned, single-sided, internally illuminated sign. Identifies the church, times of service, things of that nature.
um brawn street um it's largely residential in this area you can see to either side you have
across the street caddy corner you have the fox chase elementary school
then other than that it's residential until you get down to the shopping center
where the train station is and as i indicated as you saw in the aerial there's a number of
Buildings, it's a fairly large property, spread out throughout the property.
I'm just going to quickly scroll to Gene.
So on the Gene side, this is the building where you see the existing sign.
It's a non-illuminated wall sign.
That's the sign that I mentioned is to be documented because there's no record of that.
It's interesting.
It didn't mention it in the description in the Notice of Refusal.
but it included it in the calculation for square footage for that street frontage.
And again, when we're done with this process,
I want to make sure that the church has three legal signs
and there's no question as to that when they're finished.
This, as you'll see from the drawings,
is the location of where that existing free standing sign
that I initially showed you is to be relocated.
And again, here's the original drawings that were submitted to L&I.
And it shows, again, A, which is the new double-sided freestanding sign that includes the digital sign.
By definition, in the zoning code, it's a digital sign.
The thing is, is that they included, well, initially, the square footage is 59.8 square feet, but did not include the base.
um there's a question as to where whether or not by definition the base should be by definition
the zoning code the base should be included but i wasn't able to confirm with and it was clearly
shown that the base was not included in the calculations but the examiner asked to try to
get in touch with the examiner to confirm whether or not that's correct or whether we should properly
show the square footage that includes the base we showed both plans both the existing plans and the
plans that i'll show you in a minute the revised plans that include the square footage with the
base um that's the only real kind of question regarding um that sign is and the thing that i
want to either have addressed with a corrected refusal revised plan stamped by the board or
an amended notice of refusal um sign b which is
an amended notice of refusal um as sign b which is i mentioned um is the relocated sign from the
front that's 32 square feet and then sign c and again um sign c is that existing sign so you can
see if i take it take you to the revised zoning drawings that they're they're exactly the same
the only thing is is that we you know included the base in the calculations the overall size
of the sign did not change so again it's a double-sided sign has some width to it and then
there this is the digital portion right here this is the two feet by eight feet 24 inch by 96 inch
digital on both sides as opposed to being a message board it's seven feet 10.61 inches tall
freestanding signs are only permitted to be seven feet tall digital signs as noted in notice of
refusal are not permitted in the zoning district. And we can go through that in the middle.
Here's some, these are exactly what was submitted, you know, as far as graphically,
the pictures, the original drawing, and then again, in the revised drawing.
And here you can see on this drawing, we provide a little more detail on the revised drawings,
but nothing effectively changed the original zoning drawings again showed the relocated sign
that freestanding sign internally illuminated statically illuminated being located to the wall
for existing signs c is located and you can see here it's exactly the same we just added some
dimensions just for the community group meaning to be to be clear c is not illuminated and there's
no intention to illuminate them. You can see here, again, they only reference two signs in
the application, but they include three signs in the calculations of square footage, as I mentioned
on genes. They call the message board, as you can see in the relevant sections of the zoning code
that I've included with the exhibit book. You have an electronic message sign, you have a digital sign,
and then you have an accessibility digital news ticker and because they reference it a notice of
refusal uh animated illumination and so going back here there's only three types of signs
that fall under that category and the one that fits most clearly is the digital sign
and so it's those things that we wanted to try to get clear with uh with the examiner so that
the permit is accurate. And again, so there's no issues with the church when we go forward.
I mentioned that there are some properties nearby that have digital signs. So right down at Jeans
and Ron, there's the Bethany Baptist Church, which has a freestanding digital sign. I could not find,
I include zoning archives with my exhibits. I could not find any, interesting, I couldn't find
any zoning archives for the church, which is shocking to me. You have the older church building
and newer buildings. It might have been under a different address. We checked every possible
address it could be and couldn't find anything. There aren't any zoning archives for Bethany
Baptist at 460 Ron, but there is a freestanding digital sign there. A little further down the
street, I mentioned at American Heritage, right by the train station. You can see here
and probably greater square footage with their digital with their digital sign double-sided
and i mentioned that's right in front of councilman o'neill's office it's just at the
back his office at the back of the parking lot a little further down the street you got reekers
meets that also has a digital sign you can see here double-sided a couple streets down there's
a daycare also internal static illumination with a part of it similarly being digital sign
and then i mean it's a little further away but i know this is driving over um on harvison and
bruce that very similar to what something not similar but something similar to what we're
proposing here where it's a static it's a fixed sign that has a digital portion um i couldn't
find a zoning permit for that sign, but it is there. We included Exhibit 7, all the old deeds
showing our clients own the property. I mentioned we don't owe any taxes on the property. My client
doesn't own any taxes, but we did have issues trying to pull tax clearance. If we need to do
something else, we can provide that after the fact. A copy of the hearing notice. It did copy
what was in the notice of refusal, so the description of what the project was for is
the same, a little slightly limited, but again, what we presented to the community group and
But again, what we presented to the community group and explained to them in great detail, a member of the sign company, a representative from the sign company who's on the call today, was there.
explained to them in great detail.
We went through the types of illumination, the amount and extent of the illumination, the duration of the illumination, things of that nature with the community group.
Our posting photographs, we posted on each of the frontages at Ron, at Stanwood.
And then I didn't also add and then also add at Jean.
And then 14303 notices we originally.
Well, here's the email from the planning commission identifying Fox Chase Civic Association as the coordinating RCO for the project.
The list of addresses to which we sent the notices.
We sent out two notices. We were originally going to have a meeting in June on June 12th.
We didn't have the meeting then.
And then instead, I'm sorry, not on June 12th, on July 1st, I beg your pardon, on July 1st, or July 10th.
And then we didn't go forward with that, but then we did meet on September 11th.
And so with that, I would have my client and a member of the sign company, Casey Signs, adopt my statements.
and then we would open that up to any questions
that the board of members of the audience might have.
Bring your client on first.
Father Chris, are you on?
Father Chris, if you are in the virtual audience,
please raise your hand.
Father Chris has been allowed to speak.
Could you please state your name
and spell for the court stenographer?
My name is Christopher Walsh,
C-H-R-I-S
T-O-P-H-E-R
Last name.
Tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing
but the truth, sir. Yes, sir.
Father Chris,
you heard the statements I made
to the, this is your parish, correct?
It is. Okay.
And you
heard the statements that I made to the board today?
I did. And are you
true and correct to the best of your knowledge?
They are all true as far as I'm aware.
Okay. And would you adopt them as your own?
I do adopt them as my own.
Thank you.
And then I have a representative from Casey Signs who raised his hand.
He signs.
So, Mr. Orfanides, you're an officer of the court and will gladly accept your testimony.
Questions from the board?
Questions or comments from our attorney, Hillary Emerson?
Not at this time, Mr. Chair.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
I see no hands at this time, Chair.
Planning Commission?
Amy Boyd with the Planning Commission.
The Comprehensive Plan recommends a change in zoning at this location from the existing residential single-family split zoning of RSA 3 and RSD 3 to RSA 3.
The Appellant has shown evidence of unique circumstances and conditions that would require relief from the zoning code.
The proposed use is accessory to the current use and would not injure the use of adjoining properties.
the planning commission recommends that the board grant all requested sign variances with proviso
that the signs comply with the minimum message duration and brightness standards for signs with
illumination thank you uh hillary we're going to hold this till we correct the refusals is that
correct yes i can work with mr orphanetes and l and i and see whether it should be corrected or
amended. Thank you. Thank you very much, Mr. Orphanides, but this will, it's closed except
for that. Am I correct, Hillary? Yes, closed except for a updated refusal to reflect what
was discussed today. Thank you, Mr. Orphanides. Thank you. May I be excused? You can. Thank you.
Okay. Number eight, MI 2024-004-144-2255 North 22nd Street. Michael Matteoni is the attorney. There's a letter of non-opposition from Council Member Young and a letter of support from all in the family CDC.
Michael Maddione has been promoted to panelist.
Good afternoon, council.
Good afternoon, counsel.
Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman.
Could you please state your name and spell for the court stenographer?
Sure. Michael Mattioni, M-A-T-T-I-O-N-I. Oh, there we go.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Could you identify your client in relationship to the property?
Certainly.
It's Mishpaha LLC, and I have its principal.
I have the principal, Ben Beagle and Sam Mandelbaum here as well.
Our vice chair has just a few questions.
Good afternoon, Counselor.
Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal or stipulate to its accuracy?
Good afternoon, and yes, I do.
Have you emailed in all the required documents and exhibits that's needed and required to proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing?
Yes, I did.
Thank you, counsel. Please proceed and share your screen.
Thank you.
Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman.
Is that all?
Yeah, we're good now. We're good now.
You might want to make it just a little larger if you can.
We'll do that, yeah.
I'll just see.
As I said, Mr. Chairman, I represent Mishpaha.
They are the owner of three properties, 2255, 57, and 59 North 22nd Street.
And again, we presented the exhibits up on the screen prior to today's hearing, including tax clearance, the refusal, a letter of support from the All in the Family CDC,
the coordinating RCO, a development agreement with All-in-the-Family CDC, revised plans form, revised zoning site plan, a copy of a bill from City Council 210-66701, and photographs.
Our clients are seeking one variance to develop this property into 18 units, where 11 units are presently permitted due to the lot size.
However, when the property was acquired on December 1st, 2021, they could have developed
this property into 18 units.
Right after they acquired the property, with no knowledge on their part, there was an overlay
pass that took away both the green roof bonus and the low-income housing bonus.
So instead of being able to develop two units for the green roof bonus and five units under
the low-income housing bonus, they were only limited to 11 units with no bonuses.
And this happened after they acquired the property.
And under that plan, they would have had to have two affordable units at 50% AMI.
Again, this ordinance was passed just after they acquired the property.
It was introduced on September 17th.
They acquired the property on September 1st, and they had no way to know that this ordinance was going to be introduced.
Again, we do have the letter of support from the All-in-the-Family CDC, the coordinating RCO, and we work with them extensively to come up with an agreement that they were supportive of.
And part of what we did was we agreed to have six affordable units out of the 18 units with two units for households earning no more than 50 percent AMI, one unit for household earning no more than 60 percent AMI, and three units for households earning no more than 80 percent AMI.
And we entered into a development agreement enforceable by the RCO, which is a CDC, and specifically entered into that with them for this reason.
Because, again, overlays are not permitted in this district, so we can't come in with the city and enter into an agreement with, typically enforceable agreement with the Planning Commission on affordable units because we're not allowed to have them under the zoning ordinance.
However, the RCO said they would like us to have the affordable units.
The other thing we did was we originally had height at 42 feet and we reduced it to 38 feet after meeting with the community.
So they wanted us, this is the height of the existing property at 2253.
And this is what we propose and we are, and that's the roof deck.
But basically, we have the same height. We're six inches taller than the existing building.
So when we came down to 38 feet, the RCO said, OK, we have no problem with that.
And that's why we have the revised plans form and the revised zoning site plan.
and that's how we measured the height.
And that's how we measured the height.
And this is the site plan,
just showing that we meet all the dimensional requirements,
height, building coverage, lot coverage, et cetera.
The only issue is the number of units.
And the floor plans show we have nine two-bedroom units,
nine one-bedroom units.
At the ground floor, lower level,
there is a trash room as well for all of the units
and the utility storage space.
And everything else is the same.
You have in the front of the building on each floor,
two bedroom units and two one-bedroom units.
And that goes through to the roof
where there is a rooftop deck for use by all of the occupants.
and again the the affordable units will be dispersed throughout the project to ensure
there is no discrepancy in the unit locations and finishes when looking at this we believe
that there was an unnecessary hardship because city council changed the ordinance took away
the right to develop the property with the bonuses right after the client acquired the
property they had no way to know that that was going to happen and all of a sudden their whole
model for developing the property was not viable because of the change in the ordinance.
We worked with the neighbors and they did agree. And we actually are building six affordable units,
which prior to the change in the ordinance, we only had to build two affordable units. And we've
agreed to build six affordable units by meeting and working with the community. We believe that,
again, that created unnecessary hardship. Our variance is the minimum variance from the
development of the property.
It's in conformity with what would have been permitted
prior to the change in the ordinance.
It permits the development of this property
as a multifamily property.
It's an RM1 zoning class,
so it is a multifamily zoning class.
It will benefit public health, safety, and welfare
by bringing development to this area.
I wanna show the photos.
I mean, it's a large, we only go to about here,
but it's a large open area with no development in the area.
i'm going to go up against this mural will be right same height basically as this existing
structure again just showing the property
and some of the surrounding properties they're all multi-family public school across the street
additional affordable units right down the street
And again, at the other end of the block, there is also some vacant properties.
So, you know, we're doing it in conformity.
It's multifamily.
That's what permitted here.
It will get rid of vacant properties, making environmental damage in the area less likely.
And we just believe that given what's happened in this, the working with the community and the unique nature of the site
and how it changed what was permitted right after the client acquired the property that
this creates the hardship and really we're going to develop in conformity with what
is already in the area. What I'd like to do, Mr. Chairman, is call on Ben Beagle.
Do we see his hand?
Yes, Ben Beagle has been allowed to speak.
Mayor, could you please state your name and spell for the stenographer?
Ben Beagle, B-E-N-B-E-I-G-E-L.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Please proceed, counsel.
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Ben, did you hear my statements?
Yes, I did.
And are they true and correct?
Absolutely.
And do you adopt them as your testimony?
Yes, I would.
Nothing further, Mr. Chair?
questions or comments from the board can you go back to the site plan please certainly
we do have our architect available as well okay
all right so to be clear this is a four-story walk-up and the vacant lot at the corner now
is five lots and your property is three of those five so you're consolidating
three of them into a single lot with opa correct
you can you scroll down a little bit i can't see the whole site point
whoops sorry about that
that's
that's the bottom
that's the bottom uh still can't see it it's always gotta scroll over it's cutting off with
still can't see it
the second stairwell for us it might just be how far it's zoomed in on your computer
yeah maybe you have to zoom in a little bit or zoom out a little bit more
too much but yes
like okay so yeah so who so what's the where's the house where's the trash being kept how is
the trash going to be removed on who has access to the yard through the use go ahead trash is
stored in the basement okay phone nine up in the front of the building we have a large trash area
in the basement of the building.
Access is through the back of the house.
It's only for, you know, access to the yard.
It's through the back of the structure,
and it's only for the people that live here.
Can you give me a second?
Hold on.
And then are the mechanicals in the basement
or in unit for each apartment?
Generally in here, but the architect could speak
to any specific questions you might have.
But that's what this large room is for, utilities and mechanicals.
And the trash is in the front.
Trash is in the front.
They're separated.
Laundries in unit?
Excuse me, I'm sorry.
Then laundry is in unit?
Laundries in each unit.
Is that the little square box that's outside of the bedrooms?
It's hard to read.
And my question is, the parallel unit to the utility unit,
Is that two units in the basement?
There's two units in the basement.
In the back, it's a one-bedroom.
In the front, it's a two-bedroom.
What's the depth of the basement slab below grade?
All right.
It's right there if you zoom into the egress well.
Yeah, I see it.
It's like eight.
Yeah, it's just two.
you're you're eight feet below grave yes
are the basement units only in the basement are they bi-level they're only in the basement
so the living so the living units in the basement are eight feet below
ground. Correct, but they have
Yeah, I say they have egress wells, but they're in for the ground.
They have egress wells, and
egress well, egress well, egress well, egress well.
So am I to understand that no one attended
the community meeting? That is correct. Well, the people from the RCO
did. But no residents on the block?
neighbors? None of the nearby neighbors. Wow, that's interesting. And my other question is,
like, has there been any kind of communication about replacing the mural that would be lost,
or is there a gap? That will be lost, and that was not an issue raised by anybody
at the RCO. I mean, we met with the RCO several times, had numerous correspondence with them,
I worked with Councilmember Young's office as well extensively to come up with the project and, you know, what to do here.
So we had several meetings with Common Crosley of the Councilmember's office.
There were mailings? I mean, letters were mailed out and nobody came to the meeting?
That is correct.
Wow, okay. Thank you.
We sent out, and there's our affidavit showing that they were sent.
There's the list of every property it was sent to, and we sent them out.
and we had one formal meeting and several informal meetings with the RCO.
Bunda Tate, I believe, is the name of the chair of the group.
I think my last question is, so what's the specific agreement, the final agreement that
was made with the RCO? Is it just about the affordability and the number of affordable units?
Yes, it's about the affordability, number of the units, unit sizes, specification, tenant eligibility, rent limits.
Oops, sorry.
Affordability, that's what they were interested in.
That's what we worked with them on.
And that's what we came up with in terms of a 50-year agreement with them.
They have the specific right to enforce it.
That's, you know, we spent a lot of time working with them on that.
Has your client have any experience renting to tenants?
Has your client have any experience renting to tenants that are below 80% AMI or marketing to tenants below 80% of AMI?
They do. I don't want to speak for them, but yes, they do.
And then has there been any thought about what the rents are going to be for those units and how those are going to be filled?
We did speak to them about that and reviewed the income limits that are out by the planning commission and also spoke to the RCO about, you know, how to get tenants in there and what they want to see and how they want us to market in the community.
So my question is, would your buy right option of 11 units, could you build possibly without having folks living in the basement, eight feet under the basement, in the basement?
i mean i guess theoretically you could
i don't know that they would but they could
have the have the units that are going to be designated for low income or as affordable
been identified like which ones they are on the floor plan we have not done that but we will meet
with the rco and they will agree with us as to what units get what designation that's part of
agreement with the rcl okay and then has i think that should include community members as well as
rcl because there's no community there's no full community input in this project and that that
concerns me understood and you know we did what we had to do and tried to get people out and send
out all the notices i mean i can't make people show up either and then what are the target rents
for these because it looks like it's it's six units so what do we know what the target rents
are for the six affordable units i don't have the numbers but we have two at 50 percent ami one at
60 percent ami and three at 80 percent ami i just don't have the specific numbers the specific
numbers in front of me okay does they're published by the they're published by the planning commission
and the guidance comes out every year sort of sort of but yeah okay you're using the city's
guidance that was my yes yes yes other questions questions or comments for our attorney
not at this time mr chair questions or comments from the virtual audience
yes chair tyrone williams has been allowed to speak
could you state your name please and spell for the stenographer yes reverend tyrone williams
Okay. Well, you were already sworn once today, Reverend.
I have a few questions about this project only because I'm concerned about the meetings that have taken place.
And as an affected RCO in the community, I have heard nothing about this project.
I'm also concerned about the rooftop decks and the egress wells, since we do have an overlay.
I wanted to know when was this project approved?
it doesn't seem to be a lot of community input and particularly from other RCOs
and as affected RCO I would like to get all documents and I would like to get a copy of
that agreement because this is the first time hearing this thank you there was only one RCO
Mr. Chairman that we were told to notify and that was all in the family CDC there were no other RCOs
And if you look on the City Planning Commission website, there is only one RCO for this property, and that is on the family CDC.
If that is the case, then I understand.
But I'm just saying if there were affected RCOs supposed to have been part of this process, including the benefit agreement, because it's a community benefit agreement, not just a benefit agreement, I would like to make sure that we are part of that process in the future.
or if we are indeed one of the affected or affected RCO for this project.
Again, Mr. Chairman, there was only one RCO that we were,
and if you look on the website, that's all you will find is one RCO,
and that's all in the family CDC.
Other questions or comments from the virtual audience?
Yes, Chair, I have a hand up by the name of Teresa Brown.
They have been allowed to speak.
How could you please state your name and spell for the court stenographer?
Teresa Brown, please unmute yourself.
Hello? Chair, Teresa Brown is still on mute.
Or anyone else in the virtual audience?
Anyone else in the virtual audience? There are no more hands at this time.
There are no more hands at this time, too.
Planning Commission.
Amy, board with the Planning Commission.
The comprehensive plan recommends no change in zoning at this location from the existing residential multifamily RM1.
The Planning Commission supports affordable housing development.
However, absent participation in a city, state, or federal program or city zoning initiative, such as a deed restriction, affordability mentioned the appellant's testimony cannot be enforced by any city agency.
Therefore, the Planning Commission has no objection to the requested variance for 18 multifamily units.
Mr. Mattione, I just want to take this back to executive session and have a conversation with the members of the board. We'll look to take action on this next Wednesday at 2 p.m.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Okay, thank you.
Thank you.
All right. Number. Number nine, MI 2024, 004-238-225-73 Geiger Road. Sean Ward is the attorney.
is it greater busselton civic league vote was 39 in support one in opposition
letter of non-opposition from council member o'neill
Mr. Ward?
Do we see Mr. Ward?
Yes, Chair.
He's not in the audience.
He's not?
Mr. Ward has been promoted to penalist.
It looks like he is talking, but we cannot hear him.
Mr. Ward?
We're having a hard time hearing you, Mr. Ward.
My apologies, Chair.
It appears that Zoom is moving slow for some participants.
We're going to try to see if we can get Mr. Ward.
Mr. Ward is coming back in as a panelist.
Can you hear me now?
We can hear you, Mr. Ward.
Oh, can you see me?
Yes, I can, Mr. Ward. Could you please state your name and spell for the court stenographer?
I'd be more than happy to do so, Mr. Chair.
My name is Sean Ward, S-H-A-W-N-W-A-R-D, attorney or applicant slash owner of the subject premises.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
And Mr. Ward, could you identify your client, please?
Yes. In this particular matter, I represent Al Stupowitz, that is S-U-P-O-W-I-T-Z, doing business as B&S Associates, which are the applicant and owner of the subject premises.
And our vice chair has just a few questions for you, sir.
Thank you.
Good afternoon, Counselor. Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal or stipulate to its agency?
I will waive. I have a question about it, but I would submit that regardless, we need zoning relief.
But I will address that as we go through.
That's a fair statement. Have you emailed in all the required documents and exhibits that's needed and required to proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing?
While they weren't submitted five days in advance, everything has been received and accepted by Board Counsel and the Zoning Board of Adjustment.
Thank you, Counsel. Please proceed and share your screen.
Okay, let me...
All right.
um chair can we confirm that my screen is shared yeah your your screen's there you might just want
to make it just a little bit larger a little a little bit of an eye testing that's that's fine
Okay. Again, I represent Al Suplowitz, who is in the virtual audience. He is a principal with B&S Associates, owner of the property at 225-73 Geiger Road, scheduled for today at 2 o'clock.
um this is an application uh my i've submitted my typical exhibit packet which includes
includes the uh list of exhibits and a summary of relief a1 is the notice of refusal
uh this is an application for adaptive reuse of industrial property uh for which there appears to
be no further demand for such use.
And it includes a rear addition as part of an existing detached structure for use as a
pickleball sports complex.
I'm sure everybody's aware that pickleball is the new craze.
And so we are looking to convert a substantial portion of this property, including an addition for a 10-court pickleball facility.
Obviously, it's not permitted in an I-2 industrial district.
With regard to the refusal, if I can just jump to that.
L&I is considering this assembly and entertainment.
However, I would submit it's active recreation, but in any event, it requires a variance for
this proposed use, whether it's considered assembly and entertainment or active recreation.
So that's the only thing that I wanted to point out with regard to the refusal.
But, you know, we acknowledge we need zoning board approval.
So regardless of how they categorize the use, it's not permitted in I-2 and we need a variant.
So A-2 is our application of appeal.
A-3 is the project information form.
our deed, proof of tax
clearance. A6
are our zoning site plans.
I beg the board's pardon.
I should
have deleted
typical floor plans because we have not
them up yet, pending approval.
And we have our
photographs, subject property, street
views, aerial views, and I do
have an additional screenshot
of posting, should the board need to see it.
Pardon me.
A9 is the RCO meeting notice and the certificate of mailing.
A10 is the letter from Greater Busselton.
I believe Jack O'Hara may have stayed on board for this hearing, and he may chime in
if needed.
I spoke to Councilman O'Neill's representative, Alice Udovich, who indicated that she submitted or they submitted a letter of non-opposition with regard to this application.
As far as relevant zoning history, going back to 2012, there was an auto repair shop and wholesale and distribution.
I would point out to the board that half of the existing building is occupied by the auto repair and one or other wholesale distribution businesses, i.e. a landscaper.
They are going to be exiting their occupancy.
So that portion of the building, in addition to the addition, will be used for the subject pickleball facility.
So at A13, we have the zoning map and A14 is the aerial photo.
So as far as existing conditions go, there's...
So as far as existing conditions go, there is a self-storage facility operated by the owners that is going to remain.
The auto repair use and the landscaper use, they will be vacating the building.
However, the landscaper will maintain some outdoor storage area, which does not affect this application one way or the other.
At present, the days and hours of operation of the pickleball facility would be Monday through Friday, roughly from 8 a.m. to 10 p.m.
Weekends, they haven't yet determined, but that would be forthcoming.
They anticipate 10 full-time employees and part-time employees as needed moving on.
Right now, they do include a juice bar, but that would be limited right now to vending machines, more or less self-serve.
As time goes on, if the juice snack bar requires or suggests that we need some actual employees and more active use, we would go to that.
So in my packet is the notice of refusal.
Here I'm going to zoom out just so you can see the docs.
The application of appeal.
The project information form.
My transmittal letter to the board.
This is the deed indicating that my applicant is the owner.
This is proof of tax clearance, all taxes are paid through the applicable tax period.
This would be the zoning site plan that was submitted, as you can see by the red bubble
outline.
uh this is the uh proposed addition to the existing building which is here
this is a rendering of the site plan showing what exists now uh right now there is this
field, which is basically parking, loading, et cetera.
And then what we are proposing is in the blue section would be the new addition.
As you can see, there is parking to the left, you know, in between the addition and the
existing building and parking out here. All this area to the right would
continue to exist as the outdoor storage uses.
Let me go down and here's just some exterior photos of the subject
property. This would be the main entry coming in from Geiger Road. This is
coming around to the rear again this is one of the tenants that currently
occupies which will be exiting currently on site is a cell tower utility site
again another interior photo of one of the tenants that will be exiting the
property. We had a meeting with Greater Busselton Civic League on November 19th. I would add that
I was on vacation. However, I did participate in that meeting from my vacation site with Jack O'Hara
and the Greater Busselton Civic League so as to not further delay this meeting.
We have the list of addresses that were sent to, our certificate of mailing.
Mr. O'Hara greatly submitted a letter of support.
As you can see, it was 39 to 1.
Let me blow that up.
So it's 39 to 1 in support of this application.
39 to 1 in support of this application.
Mr. Stupowitz is present to discuss how members of the league asked him to stay back to discuss this facility because they were quite very excited.
So this is just my zoning map.
uh you just heard a case previously around uh regarding 260 geiger road which is an in-ear
proximity but again red line road is running uh upper left the lower right uh the site where my
cursor is is the former uh bud plant um and then a golf course and now future site of the
much controverted USPS or some shipping site. So again, here is the aerial photograph.
This is the existing building. And as you can see from the prior plans,
the addition would be in this area right here where you see what appears to be
you know uh trailers trucks um but everything else on site will remain and uh two of the existing
uses the auto repair and uh one of the the landscaper in indoor storage and use will be
gone. That is the extent of my
presentation.
I do have Mr. Supperwitz in the
audience. Al, if you could raise your virtual hand
and then we can verify and adopt.
Alan Supperwitz
has been allowed to speak.
could you please state your name is spelled for the court stenographer
it's alan a-l-l-e-n last name supowitz s-u-p-o-w-i-c-z
we're referring to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth
yes i do please proceed counsel
al uh have you heard my representations to this board this day yes i have
And have they been true and correct to the best of your knowledge, information and belief?
And would you adopt my representations as your own testimony?
Is there anything you might want to add in addition to what I've represented already?
um just said after our meeting with the bustling civic association a lot of people stayed actually
wouldn't even let us leave we were there for a while answering questions they were quite excited
as excited as i am to hopefully get this pickleball facility opened up so that that made me feel good
because it's going to be good for the community and good for everybody uh so that that's all i
want to add. I hope we can take everything into consideration. All right, Al. And you're familiar
with the issues that have been going on in that Geiger Road, Gantry Road, industrial park area,
correct? Yes. And to eliminate an auto repair use or the interior landscaper use,
Do you think that falls in line with what the desires of the owners and operators over there? Is it consistent?
Yes, it is. I believe it is.
Okay. And given your close proximity to residential development in Greater Busselton, do you think this is an appropriate use for your property? And do you anticipate success, especially given this pickleball craze that's ongoing?
Yes, I do. Just with the response that we've had from the people that know we're trying to get this to go through, they've been very, very excited and they're looking forward to it, as I am.
Okay. Thank you, Al. Mr. Chair, I believe either Alice Udovich from Councilman O'Neill's office is either online or submitted a non-opposition.
So just while you have your client on, just out of curiosity,
could you ask him how high he's going to build?
What height?
I mean, like you can't do like an eight-foot ceiling.
You got to take – how large will the building be?
How large will the building be?
The height's going to be as high as my current warehouse, around 23 feet.
The height's going to be as high.
It's not going to be any higher.
It's going to be the same height as the current warehouse.
Thank you.
Questions from the board?
I think it's pickleball, and you can drop your kids off at the daycare,
play a game of pickleball, and pick them up, I think.
It would be pretty cool.
I don't know.
Hey, Michael, you know, to me, pickleball is a cross between ping pong and tennis.
You know, it's like somewhere in the middle there.
People are loving it.
But, yeah, you know, and not for nothing.
You know, in my neighborhood, you know, there's outdoor pickleball courts and people complain about the noise.
You know, the whack, the whack, the whack, you know.
And but this is this is going to be indoor. And that that that question was raised at Greater Busselton about, you know, are you going to be able to hear it from outside the building?
And, you know, we said no, because, you know, now that it's not just a strictly warehouse use, you know, it's going to be insulated because people need to feel comfortable in an HVAC, you know, area.
so uh no so you know you know we believe we addressed that but it's funny you know how people
uh how people respond but now we you know we think um you know given the uh you know the area
residential uses and this uh demand for pickleball um you know i think i think al's on to something
here and it's going to be uh it's going to be good for the neighborhood thank you other questions
from the board i have a question about signage so i've noticed it's not a part of this application
and has the tenant or the owner thought about what signage they're going to need for this facility
and is the plan for that to just be a future zoning application uh i would i would just submit
that you know signage as permitted uh if there is anything that uh requested that is you know
outside of what's permitted, you know, we'll be back to see you.
Questions from the board.
Questions from our attorney, Hillary Emerson.
Not at this time, Mr. Chair.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience.
I see no hands at this time, Chair.
Planning Commissioner.
Amy Boyd with the Planning Commission.
The comprehensive plan recommends no change in zoning at this location from the existing medium industrial I-2.
The appellant has not demonstrated that there are unique physical conditions or circumstances
that would prevent the property from being used in conformance with the zoning code.
The Planning Commission recommends that the Board deny the requested variance for assembly and entertainment.
hillary are we okay with that assembly and entertainment as a
so i i was thinking about that mr chair i'm wondering if that's and i have to check with
lni but i wonder if it was put in that category because it is an indoor facility i believe we
had a case before that was um like a rock climbing gym and they were considered that assembly and
entertainment um i have to check i mean it i don't i don't mind checking with lni but that
would be my guess as to why it got that designation i'm glad sean yeah if if i may
um you know i i you're the one that raised that issue by the way you'd raise the issue
yeah uh but i i've looked through both sections of the code and this seems to be something that
doesn't really fall into one category or the other uh so l and i considers it assembly and
entertainment um which you know i'm not going to argue against uh me personally yeah i would think
it's some kind of you know recreation or athletic or something but um you know if if l and i in their
you know, infinite wisdom
determines
or concludes that
it's a
assembly and
entertainment use, then, you know, I'm not
going to argue with that, but
I just raised it as a question
because, you know,
and Mr. Chair, if you're
concerned about the use not being specific
enough, because this is something
this is something that it would i mean it could arguably go into personal services as well which
that would, I mean, it could
arguably go into personal services as well,
which is
is also not permitted in your industrial oh you know we zoning we added so we added this
we added this down on delaware avenue to a large property we had down there
and they actually made it like a club remember they had a liquor license and things like that
where you could watch games and all right right right right yeah um but if you if you were concerned
about the use the category being overly broad you could provide so it's specific use within that
category yeah yeah hillary you know we're we're willing to accept the refusal as stated and uh
you know and ask the board to grant uh the variance from that which was issued uh because
you know we acknowledge that regardless of what category falls in you know i mean we can argue
that until the cows come home but uh you know we'll accept the refusal as assembly and entertainment
because people are actually assembling you know to play pickleball okay all right okay all right
so mi 2024 004 238 225 to 73 geiger road i vote yes my vote is yes
cheryl guest and my vote is yes tenetta graham my vote is yes i went my vote is yes
ishmael shaheed my vote is yes thank you council number 12 that concludes my business maybe excuse
sure you absolutely yep so number 12 mi 2024 004 377 4902 knock street alan knockamson
is the attorney. Letter of
unanimous
opposition from Solo Germantown.
The vote was for
an opposition to the Bureau in support.
Nockmson, you've already been sworn that I could
just for the record, could you please state your name?
Nockmson.
could you uh identify your client a relationship to the property yeah my client is warren realty
holdings llc the owner of the property and our vice chair has just a few questions for you sir
good afternoon counsel do you agree the way to read another refusal or stipulate to us
accuracy i do have you emailed in all the required documents and exhibits as needed
and required to proceed with this case
five days in advance of this hearing?
Yes, we have.
Thank you, counsel.
Please proceed and share your screen.
All right, thank you.
Let me do that.
All right, so first things first,
we're asking that I be able to present
and then have a resumption hearing.
um we originally had a date earlier this year uh for a hearing we continued that hearing to
allow us to have a community i think a second community meeting we've been on we were unable
to get that second community meeting uh for it to take place by today um we do have it scheduled
for January 7th, so we would ask that I would be able to present. We did have a community meeting,
just no vote was taken at the original one, and that we would have a resumption hearing. It would
be helpful if we can have it sometime in January, but I'm sure our office will work with the ZBA's
administrator on that. Yeah, and I think that's part of, I think I heard when I was transitioning
in to the panelists. There is a letter from
Solo, and I think they were upset we never had a community meeting
thinking I was going to just present this to the board without that
second community meeting, and that was not our intention. So I just want to let you know that
as well. So we have, you know, our typical table
of contents is our notice of refusal. We were waiting
from correspondence from the 12th Ward Democratic Committee, hoping to have
that second community meeting. We did not. I did slip in the letter from Solo, just as full
disclosure. We do have a petition, a pretty extensive petition of people in support of
this project, as well as a letter from the owner of 4900 Knox Street, which is next to us,
in support of this project. Not out of character to have multifamily on this block
for RSA 5 properties of this sort.
4,900 NOx is multifamily,
which is next door to us on the left.
4,904 to the right of us, multifamily.
multifamily. 4901, 03, 05, 07, and 13 are on multifamily. We'll go through that in our
4,901, 03, 05, 07, and 13 are multifamily.
presentation. We'll then review maps of the area, photographs of the property in the surrounding
area, our simple plans and drawings. Again, all we're doing is a legalization here. My client
bought it as a triplex, expecting to be able to get rental licenses as a triplex. Came as a shock
to him when he tried to get rental licenses and found out that, you know, given this is an RSA
property, we would have to go through this process. I have the RCO meeting notice. I don't
know if it's for the original one or the future one, but we have something showing that we did
meet with the community or plan to meet a second time with the community. Our applications for
appeal that we filed on behalf of Warren Realty Holdings, LLC, the deed to the property showing
that they own the property and the certificate of tax clearance. At the conclusion of my presentation,
I would ask that Matt Kahn, the owner's representative, virtually raise his hand and be sworn in.
Notice of refusal. So this is an RSA3 property. We're asking for three family household living.
It looked like there's two doors there.
My client took the casing of that looks like a door that was a window and put in a door in there.
So there's a direct access for the first floor units from the outside.
And then the second and third floor units, we go through a separate door.
Originally, when my client purchased the property, it was one door, you know, three, one front door, three units.
Now it's two front doors, three units.
But we have two refusals.
One is for the fact that we're seeking multifamily use.
And this is RSA 3, which is not allowed under the code.
Again, this property was three units when we purchased it.
It looks like it has a long history of three units.
It's a picture of three mailboxes that were associated with this property before my client purchased the property.
And there are, I believe, six or seven instances of multifamily structures just on that block, including ones to the left and right of us.
The second refusal has to do with parking.
you know because this is an RSA 3 property we are required to have some type of off-street parking
on the property itself it would be physically impossible for us to have parking here given
that this is an existing building structure and parking wouldn't fit on this property and again
not out of character because you don't see that in this neighborhood anyway even when you have
multiple units, such as the ones I referenced beforehand. Correspondence, we did not have a
second meeting with the community, and I think that's why Solo was upset. Obviously, we are
planning to have one January 7th, 2025. And then this is their explanation about this project.
I feel like it would be more appropriate for me to respond after we have the community meeting.
Petition. Again, you see my client really focused on the properties on Knox Street.
And then here's a letter of support from Knox as well.
And then the 4,900 blocks of Knox Street are nearby multifamily. We have three units on 4,901
Knox Street, four units at 4903 Knox Street, three units for 4905 Knox Street, three units for 4907
Knox Street, three units for 4903 Knox Street. All these properties, including ours, are very
large lots. Our lot is 1,882 square feet. And in addition to those lots I mentioned, again,
And 4,900 and 4,904, which are connected to us to left and right, are also multifamily in nature.
Maps to the area, well, yeah, to the outside world, this looks like a solid single-family neighborhood.
It's not.
There's multiple instances just like us where multifamily has been there.
We're just trying to legalize that use so we can use the property for three-family dwelling.
That's what we thought we were buying.
um again we're not we're off wayne area avenue which you know has you know public transportation
and it's also commercial zoning in nature photographs of the property um can't really
see it here but this is where the three mailboxes are um but you know we didn't really change
anything other than this door this door used to be a window um and again everyone prior to us
purchasing it would go through the front door we'll look at the floor plans but you would make
a right immediate right to the first floor unit and then each floor has its own unit this window
this window that was encased, like you would see it like a door, my client's like, well,
that's was in case like you would see it like a door my clients like
might as well just have the first floor unit have direct access to their unit from the outside. And
that's the only change that he made. Everything else has stayed the same. Here's our orange notice
poster for today's hearing. This is Knox Street to the right of the property, Knox Street to the
left of the property. And then we just decided, you know, here, here are some interior photos of
our property. Again, my client hasn't really made any changes at all.
And then just our plans and drawings, again, existing footprints, but, you know, here's the
two doors, the door to the right, which was added. It was a window before. Before that,
you would go through the door in the front, the left one, and you would just make a right into
unit number one, and again, going up the steps for units two and three each on a separate floor.
Instead, we have this door here, which is unit number one. It's an open floor plan, and it has
a bedroom and a full bath down here. And then there is a lower level, which again, is just
finished, but there's no living, you know, there's no bedrooms in the basement. This is where the hot
order, uh, heaters are for each of the units. Each of the units have washer and dryers in the
units, as well as separate HVAC units in the individual units. Instead of going through the
front door to the right for unit number one, you go through the front door to the left,
you go up a flight, you get in the vestibule area, you go up a flight of steps. Uh, this is
a one-bedroom, one-bath. And then you, instead of, you know, again, open floor plan, kitchen,
living room again the HVAC units here with a washer and dryer bathroom and then a bedroom
you go instead of unit number two you go up to another flight of steps is unit number three
and again you would see an open floor plan kitchen living room area HVAC along with a washer and
dryer and here is the bedroom they actually have two bedrooms here and here's the bath behind that
RCO meeting notice we met on September 19th at 6 p.m.
This is proof of our mailing to the 99 addresses that we're in, that we're required to mail notice of that community meeting.
Our application for appeal that we filed on behalf of Warren's Realty Holdings, LLC,
along with the notice of refusal, the project information form, the deed to the property showing that they own the property,
And then filing the Certificate of Tax Clearance. Well, it does say we have a balance here. It's because of 2025 taxes, which are not yet due yet.
I was actually told that another member of the LLC, Siobhan Jackson, is actually in the virtual audience instead. So I would ask that Siobhan virtually raise his hands.
Siobhan Jackson has been allowed to speak.
Hi, could you please state your name and spell for the stodogar?
Good afternoon, everyone.
My name is Siobhan Jackson.
Could you spell, please, for the reporter?
C-H-A-B-O-N-E-J-A-C-K-S-O-N.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Please proceed, counsel.
hi yes um mr jackson you heard everything i had to state today about jorzoni matter yes is it true
and correct yes do you adopt as your own testimony yes thank you uh one other point um members of
the board and i failed to state that during my presentation is that this this property does not
have a history of single family use if you look at the lni file for this at one point this was a
single-family home with a separate daycare in it. So even though this is an RSA-3 zoning
classification, it's never really been used as single-family. And given the surrounding area
and how similarly situated properties are multifamily in nature, despite its zoning
classification, I respectfully request that the board grant the variance for three-family dwelling.
We'll do that the next time we get together.
questions from the board
I should say we'll vote the next time
I have no question
I have a question just for some clarity
so you're saying that your client purchased
the property as a triplex but he
installed the door the second door
yeah the second door
so what happened is
and let me get to the floor plans and I think
maybe I didn't explain it that well
let's see
so before when this door didn't exist this was just a window but the shape of the window was
it was a door so i mean that's what it looked like and he's and he instead so all he did was
literally put a door in that casing where that where that window used to be before what happened
is before that that door was there this door the front door to the property gave exclusive
of access to unit number one. There used to be a door right here for direct access to unit number
one. And then you would go up a flight of steps for unit number two, go up another flight of
steps for unit number three. Did I answer your question? I guess my question is, was the new
owner, did they do that work? Or when they purchased a property, was that original door
to the first one there? No, that's the only thing that my client did do. After he purchased the
property, he added that second door. Okay. Then found out that it wasn't zoned for triplex
legally? Yeah. So when he tried to get the rental license for three units,
he didn't realize that this wasn't a legal triplex and that's when we were hired.
Thank you. You're welcome.
Any questions for the board?
Questions or comments from our attorney, Hillary Amberson?
not at this time mr chair
questions or comments from the virtual audience yes chair charles richardson has been allowed to
speak i'm mr richardson how are you sir i'm well chair um charles richardson r-i-p-h-a-r-d-s-o-n
office of councilwoman cindy bass room 508 city hall you swear or affirm to tell the truth told
truth is nothing but the truth i certainly do please proceed uh i wanted to add this little
clarity to uh you're receiving this um this this letter from solo germantown um it's very confusing
and i sent something in a little earlier today i don't know whether you guys got it or not
uh and and and it seems that solo tends to give wrong numbers and things along those lines
There were individuals there that had been invited by Ms. Weiss, who lived outside of the neighborhood and outside of that territory.
And they only list that nine people were there, including myself, two attorneys, and several other people, but also four solo members, which she called the community.
That was not the case because, again, she had more individuals there who did not live in that neighborhood.
It was agreed by strongly suggested, number one, by me and agreed by by everyone else that there would be a second meeting because there were no near neighbors there.
In fact, Ted Stones, the board leader and chair of the coordinating RCO, had said that he would, when they scheduled the next meeting, he would be going around door to door, you know, and trying to get people to respond and come out to that meeting.
So, you know, I found out this morning that there was another meeting that was scheduled, which Mr. Nuckamson has said will be in early January.
So we are not opposed to having a resumption hearing so that we can actually get the near neighbors out and then get their opinion and see where everything stands from that point.
So just wanted to add that little bit of clarity to that.
There was no vote taken or anything for anybody to make a determination such as what you guys received.
Thank you very much for taking this time to pause.
We appreciate it.
Is there anyone else in the virtual audience?
I see no more hands at this time, Terry.
Planning Commission, we're going to have a resumptive hearing.
You want to hold your vote until then?
Thank you.
Thank you.
So there'll be a resumptive hearing after there's a second meeting.
We'll update it and then go back to the board and also the virtual audience to see where we stand and then planning and we'll vote.
Okay, Hillary?
That sounds good, Mr. Chair. Thank you.
All right. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Nackamson.
All right. MI 2024, 005-779-6300-18 Stenton Avenue.
Merneth Ferliger is the attorney.
Unanimous support from the Cliveland Hill Association.
Meredith Ferliger will be joining us as a panelist.
Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman, members of the board.
Good afternoon, counsel.
Could you please state your name and spell for the stenographer?
Sure thing.
Meredith Ferliger, F-E-R-L-E-G-E-R.
We're affirmed to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
Could you identify your client, the relationship to this property?
My client this afternoon is Citizens Bank N.A., which is the lessee of the property at 6300 Staten Avenue.
White Chair has a few questions for you.
Good afternoon, Counselor.
Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal or stipulate to its accuracy?
I sure do.
Have you emailed in all the required documents and exhibits that is needed to proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing?
I did. Thank you, counsel. Please proceed and share your screen.
Already done. Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman, members of the board. Again, Meredith Ferliger of
Gilworth Paxson here this afternoon on behalf of Citizens Bank. I should have one of our project
managers with Citizens Bank in the audience today, as well as a representative from the
sign company, Ms. Yoretta Hale. Before the board today is a proposal for the replacement of an
existing freestanding sign that is a part of Citizens Bank rebranding and signage modernization
program at 6300 Stanton Avenue. The sign in question has been in its current location in
some fashion since the early 90s, but the zoning code has since changed, which now requires a
variance even just for the replacement of the existing sign. Given the extraordinarily
straightforward nature of this request, I will keep my presentation short today and will be
very happy to answer any questions that the board might have. Our exhibit packet in front of you
contains 16 exhibits, which we do request be moved into evidence at the conclusion of the presentation.
That exhibit packet includes tax clearance at Exhibit 2, as well as a redacted copy of
Citizens' Lease at Exhibit 3. And just by way of context for board council, the lease was signed
in 1971 by Gerard Trust Bank, who was a predecessor to Citizens Bank. So this lease is still in effect
today. At Exhibit 10, you will see on the zoning map that the property at 6300 Staten Avenue is
Zone CMX2, and sits right at the corner of Stanton Avenue and East Washington Lane.
We've also included aerial views, which are up on your screen at Exhibit 11.
From this image here, you'll notice that there are two freestanding signs here.
You can somewhat see them in this image here, one on Stanton and one on East Washington Lane.
You can see these slightly better here in this view from the west. I'll zoom in a little bit.
And again, you can see those two existing freestanding signs. You'll also take note
in these aerial images that this is a fairly dense commercial area with the bank right at
the corner here. Street perspective photographs are shown here at Exhibit 16. These reflect that
the bank and all the exist these photographs reflect the bank itself and all the existing
signage prior to the modernization efforts commencing and again here you will see those
two existing freestanding signs which exist on each of the property frontages the next view here
is from stanton avenue and as i will show you momentarily all of this signage in this image
is being replaced but was permitted prior to the filing of this application.
The next view for context here is from East Washington Lane where the parking lot sits.
This here, as you'll see in this image, is the freestanding sign at issue before the board today.
This is identified as sign S2. This next image is also shown from the parking lot and again you'll
just see the context of the two signs. The next view is just facing in the opposite direction.
And again, as you'll see from these images here, this is a commercial corridor with no
residential uses surrounding the bank property. Again, right from the corner, there's an auto
zone directly across the street. And in the back along East Washington Lane is a Dunkin' Donut.
And in the back, along East Washington Lane, is a Dunkin' Donuts.
We did also include photographs of the zoning posters, which were timely posted on both frontages of this property.
Now, in terms of general project context, I did include at Exhibit 6 some before and after images of all of the signage that is being replaced with the modernization program
and Citizens Rebranding Program.
You may or may not know that Citizens Bank
is actually becoming just citizens.
So that is one of the reasons why this signage
is all being switched out,
not just on this branch location, but nationwide.
All of the signage that you'll see in these images here
was previously approved by Wright,
but I thought it would be helpful for the board
for me to include it for context.
This Washington Lane frontage does not have much signage, but the facade will also be updated with newer color bands.
There's also a couple of smaller signs around the site that will also be updated as well.
At the Stanton Avenue frontage at Exhibit 7, this shows the existing, the sign S1 that is being replaced, which was previously permitted.
So the Staten Avenue freestanding sign is not before the board today.
Now, before I actually move into the sign that's in front of you today, just by way of historical context, I did at Exhibit 9 include permits reflecting two zoning permits, both from 1991 and 2002.
In 1991, you'll see here on the right, two existing freestanding signs were first built for the Mellon PSFS Bank.
Those signs were each 7 by 8 feet and 20 feet high with interior illumination.
In 2002, you'll see here on the left, Citizens Bank took over and two new Citizens branded pylon signs were installed.
These were replaced with two new 55 square foot signs that were 19 feet high each.
Now Citizens First applied to replace all of its signage for the current 2024 monetization back in
August. All of those replacements were approved by Wright, with the exception of the one freestanding
sign. As the board may know, CMX 2 only permits one freestanding sign per property, where in this
case, two have a very long history of existing on this site. I did also include that August zoning
permit just for reference. So turning back again, the proposed freestanding sign on East Washington
Lane that is replacing the existing sign is shown here at Exhibit 8. This does reflect a revised
plan that we did submit to the board and a revised plan proviso form, which I will address.
This proposed sign is 72 feet high, is 72 feet high, 72 square feet and 18 feet high.
This sign was originally proposed to be 15 feet high, but during the community meeting,
community members very wisely pointed out some of the site conditions that would actually
potentially impair some of the visibility of the Stanton Avenue freestanding sign at the then
proposed height. I think I can actually show you that here. If you've seen this image, they pointed
out that this wall might actually impair visibility. So as a result, we are going to
increase the height of the sign by just a couple of feet to avoid that impairment on Stanton Avenue.
So, per CMX2 regulations, a freestanding sign may be 20 feet high, so this change still remains
code compliant. The sign itself will have internal elimination, and we do have representatives from
the sign company should the board have any detail questions. The revised plan submitted to the board
are four pages, which should be consistent with the number of pages that was originally submitted
to L&I. Now regarding the refusal, as I referenced earlier, only one refusal was issued for this
proposed sign since CMX2 would only permit one freestanding sign on this two-street frontage
location. The applicant submits to a hardship primarily as a result of the over 20-year history
of a variety of banks at this location benefiting from two freestanding signs. Although the proposed
sign is entirely consistent in both overall size and height to the currently existing signs.
to the currently existing signs, the zoning code dictates that a nonconformity or previously
The zoning code dictates that a non-conform
permitted condition is lost upon demolition. This would be the third time these signs are
being replaced in their current location on site. Even if the sign itself was not already existing,
the unique site conditions here would still dictate the necessity to have the second sign
at East Washington Lane at the entry point to ensure adequate visibility for customers
on this nearly 20,000-square-foot property. Unless a driver or a pedestrian is directly
at the corner, you cannot see the other freestanding sign from each of their locations.
There's also minimal signage on the East Washington Lane frontage other than this sign,
further warranting the continued presence of the sign itself.
The proposal is the least minimum variance, given that the sign is consistent in height
and overall square footage, to the historical signs that existed in the location.
The dimensions of the sign itself are permitted by the zoning code.
The signage will not create congestion, harm neighbors' properties,
impair light and air, or impair area infrastructure or facilities.
The signs will maintain the status quo condition of the site and ensure the continued visit, continued viability of this neighborhood bank branch.
Full legal analysis, as always, is provided in the memo of law submitted to the board at Exhibit 12.
And I would be very happy to touch on any particular point if you require additional clarification or justification.
As Mr. Chairman mentioned, we did meet with Cliveden Hills Association, and they unanimously, understandably, supported this request, and that is shown in the packet at Exhibit 15.
So at this time, I would ask if Grace Paolo is in the audience to dot my testimony.
She may come up as Grasa.
Can we share her hand?
Yes, Chair. Grace Paolo has been allowed to speak.
Could you please state your name and spell for the stenographer?
Grace?
She has been allowed to speak, Chair, and there on mute.
Could you hear me now?
We can.
Could you please state your name and spell for the stenographer?
Absolutely.
The name is Graza Paolo, G-R-A-C-A, last name P-A-U-L-O.
You swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Please proceed, counsel.
Thank you.
Grace, can you identify your title with Citizens Bank?
Yes, I am a project manager.
And you're authorized to speak on behalf of Citizens Bank concerning the details of this application?
Yes, I am.
And have you heard all the testimony and evidence that was offered in front of the board today?
I have.
And would you agree that testimony was true and accurate, and would you adopt it as if you had given it yourself?
Thank you. Happy to answer any questions.
Questions from the board.
questions or comments from our attorney hillary emberson
um i just wanted to note for for you mr chair um it just approves it is for it is four pages
of revised plans i initially had put that's right okay yeah it's four yep thank you questions or
comments from the virtual audience i see no he's at this time too planning commission
Amy Boyd with the Planning Commission.
The comprehensive plan recommends no changing zoning at this location from the existing commercial residential mixed use CMX2.
The proposed signs are consistent with prior signs if not under the use of adjoining properties.
The City Planning Commission recommends that the Board grant the requested variance for freestanding signs.
Thank you.
MI 2024-005-779-6300-18-Centon Avenue.
I vote yes.
Proviso, revised plans, four pages, stamped by CBA on December 11th, 2024.
Michael Johns, my vote is yes with Proviso.
Cheryl Gaston, my vote is yes with Proviso.
My vote is yes with proviso.
My vote is yes with proviso.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes with proviso.
Thank you, council.
Thank you, everyone.
Thank you.
No, 14 MI 2024-005-840, 1314 Dorrance Street.
So, 14 MI 2024-005-8.
Alok Sokoloff is the attorney.
There's a letter of unanimous support from the Point Breeze Community Development.
Look, it also provided 14 letters of support, four from the block.
Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman, members of the board, Oleg Sokolov, on behalf of the applicant.
Just for the record, Mr. Sokolov, could you please spell your name?
Sure. Oleg Sokolov, S-O-K, pardon me, O-L-E-G, S-O-K-O-L-O-V.
We're referring to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Could you identify your client in relationship to the property?
Yes, my client is the property owner, Bull Real Estate Ventures, LLC, and Ms. Dana Dugan is the sole member of that LLC and is on the line with me here today.
Our vice chair has a few questions for you, sir.
Good afternoon, counsel. Do you agree to read another refusal or stipulate to its accuracy?
I generally would, Mr. Shahid. The caveat being I received the communication from Ms. Boyd today regarding some clarity on the refusal.
I'm not sure that it's incorrect, but I believe it is the same issue addressed to both the structure itself and then the roof deck.
So it's ostensibly from what I can understand in the refusal, and perhaps Ms. Boyd or Ms. Emerson can correct me if I'm wrong, but they're both related to the rear yard setback,
one being for the deck which is on the second floor and one being for the structure itself at
the first floor level understood have you emailed in all the required documents and exhibits as
needed to proceed with this case five days in advance of the hearing i have um however i would
ask for a little liberty from the board given this this issue that was raised by ms boyd i
do have some additional photos that i'd like to share and ask that they'd be entered into evidence
as well. Please proceed. You've already shared your screen. Thank you very much. Good afternoon
again, members of the board. So what we are here seeking to do is legalize an existing condition
that was present on the property when Bull Real Estate Ventures and Ms. Dugan purchased the
property just in February of 2024. We are talking about a dimensional issue on a lot that is less
than 46 inches in 46 feet pardon me in depth therefore requiring a seven foot rear yard in
an rsa5 and we are asking for the boards uh for the board to grant a variance for use as a for a
five foot um rear yard setback this so what we have here and i'll get into it in the pictures is
we have a small deck above the back portion of the house, which is subject to the setback
requirement. And that, I believe, again, is what generates the secondary refusal per Table 14701.
I think it'll be a little more evident once we take a look at pictures of what's going on. So
a little background. Ms. Dugan, on behalf of the entity, purchased the property in February 2024.
As I said, and this property was basically in shell condition with existing framing that the previous owner had installed rotting, requiring replacement.
And in April of this same year of 2024, a violation for this nonconformity, as well as some other present issues at the property that are more pertinent to building permits than zoning permits were existent and a stop work order was issued.
Ms. Dugan and the entity ceased all construction, retained us as counsel, and we immediately put in for the appropriate zoning permit to legalize the nonconformity.
So, as stated, here's the deed to the property showing purchase in February of 2024.
here is the best we could do for evidence of tax clearance once again this is the 2025 balance that
as stated by by numerous presenters here today is not due yet so we consider the entity in the
property to be tax compliant however you know what I take that back I believe she even made
payment for the 2025. So we're fully paid up. This is just a view down the block. This boarded
up property is the property in question. And I apologize, just have to resize a few things here.
And I apologize, just have to resize a few things here.
So this is actually a picture of it even prior to Bull Ventures owning it, but even prior to construction undertaken by the previous owner.
So this is a 2019 picture of the property.
And you can see Doran Street is a property, as I'll show later, that has had a number of these
sorts of variances issued, including the immediately adjacent properties. I'll show
some aerial photos that show that the lot, basically every property on this side of the
street has an almost identical um non-conformity and had a variance issued for the five foot rear
yard setback just the zoning map of the property here doran street for for references is located
between reed and wharton and this is between 18th and 19th so right there if the board could see my
cursor. And then the plans, let me attempt to make them as big as possible here for the board.
Are the members of the board able to see this? Okay, wonderful. So what we are talking about,
and I do apologize that it may not be as evident on the plans as it will be from pictures, but
what we are talking about here is this five-foot setback right here. This is the portion of the
property that was an addition built at some point, and it is non-conforming, as would require a seven
foot rear yard setback. Now, on top of that first floor, which is only five feet from the property
line we do have a small about two or three foot deck and we do have our architect justin myers
here on the line we'll be able to answer any kind of technical questions but what we're looking at
here again is a first floor that goes beyond the the allowance or the requirement of seven feet
that only extends five feet of rear yard and then above that first floor in just a two-story
structure basically off of like the back bedroom if if the board can envision that is a small um
not roof deck but a small just balcony but since it is it's not a free hanging balcony
since it is on top of the first floor it's considered a deck
and i'll obviously be happy to go back to those plans and and allow um mr myers to answer any
technical questions but here's our application for appeal this condition was obviously not created
by the by the applicant and is just seeking to legalize the existing use so as she can continue
with this project, renovate a home that was, for all intents and purposes, abandoned in the middle
of a construction project by previous ownership, and fix it up in order to utilize it for housing
in the neighborhood. We met with the RCO, as stated by Chair Bergman, on October 28th. It was, I will
say, a decently attended meeting where we did receive unanimous support. Here's our letter from
that RCO. And as I want to just point out, some of the comments were that the property will be
renovated and uniform with the characteristics of the neighborhood. So nearby neighbors and people
familiar with the neighborhood certainly know that this is something that is existent in the
neighborhood and especially on that block. Here is a list of properties that have been granted
the same type of variance. And you'll see that they're all on that immediate block. Some of them
are part of a development of three identical houses located from 1308 to 1310, 12 South Dorrance. So
they're three houses that were built at the same time. They're identical properties,
and they also have the same five-foot rear yard.
And as Mr. Bergman stated, our 14 letters of support, including two of four on the immediate
block. What I'd like to point out just for the Board's consideration is that all of the letters
of support are from an immediate one square block radius, either on Reed Street, on Wharton Street,
And then you can see here's the stop work order. As I stated, work was ceased immediately upon receiving the stop work order. Here's our pictures of our zoning posters in the window there at the property. A little better view of those posters.
And then you can see here's the stop work order.
And then certificates of mailing. We sent out mailing to 166 nearby neighbors and four affected RCOs as well as the council person's office.
And then, again, for the sake of clarity and the pictures that weren't originally included, so this is the subject property here.
You can see that the neighboring property has a nearly identical rear yard that's also not in conformity.
And then if the board can see it here, this kind of shaded area right there that I'm trying to cursor, that is the second floor deck.
So it's about a two-foot, maybe like a Juliet balcony, if that's familiar to the board, where somebody can just step out from their bedroom, open the slider windows, and have some fresh air.
And then you will see that the characteristics of the block, here are two properties here that have identical kind of second floor decks, as well as rear yards that are certainly not seven feet.
Here are the properties, which I had previously mentioned, the 1308 to 1312 properties, which also have even less of a setback from the rear yard.
And then once again, you can see these are the three properties I mentioned as being built at the same time.
Also with roof decks.
Also with they don't have the second floor balcony.
that our refusal is subject to, but they do have the five-foot yards, if not less than five-foot
yards. And then, so this is a view from that second floor out over the balcony, which we're
discussing. You can see it's a slider door. The only thing missing from this picture as a result
of the stop work order being issued is the railing that will hopefully, with the board's approval of
this variance inevitably go on this balcony. This is a view down from the roof. And you can see that
there's still ample space for a backyard. There is a alley, a trash alley of sorts or another type
of opening. So there is a separation between the subject property and the property immediately
to its back abutting it to its back okay so here here is what we're talking about this
structure here is the non-conformity of five feet this if the board can imagine will have a railing
it's hard to do this on the diagonal but right
in that area and we hope to use it as the second floor balcony
And you can see that the structure directly adjacent to it also is further into the rear
yard than the subject property.
At this time, if I may bring Ms. Dana Dugan on to adopt my testimony and just add a little
context to her, how she acquired ownership and her involvement in the neighborhood,
please Dana Dugan has been allowed to speak Dugan could you please state your name and spell for the
court stenographer yes my name is Dana Dugan first name uh d-a-n-a last name Dugan d-u-g-g-a-n
you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth
Yes, sir.
Please proceed, counsel.
Thank you, Chair.
Good afternoon, Ms. Dugan.
Is it correct to say that you're the sole member of Bull Real Estate Ventures LLC?
Yes, sir.
And have you heard my testimony or presentation to the board today?
And would you adopt my testimony as your own?
Yes, sir.
Could you just give the board a little context on, you live in the neighborhood as well,
correct?
Yes, I live about three blocks from this property, same zip code, 19146.
Okay, and at the time of purchasing this property, you weren't aware of any kind of nonconformities existing or any kind of zoning issues?
Correct, sir. I was not aware prior to purchasing.
And as soon as you received the stop work order, you ceased all construction work there and undertook this zoning appeal?
Yes, sir.
could you give the board just some context on on the kind of work that was required at the property
Could you give the board just some context on the kind of work that was required at the property and the state of the property at the time that you purchased it?
Yes, sir.
So, yes, there was a lot of work required and work that still needs to be done.
We purchased it.
I purchased it in a shell condition.
I replaced, I put a new roof there, put a new roof, fixed the damaged framing on the inside, and then put new windows as well.
okay and that and that's as far as you got before you you receive the stop work order
yes sir okay um i know for the questions if it pleases the board i'd be happy to bring on
mr myers to to answer any technical questions about the plans the board wants it so so you
have two zoning refusals right rear yard depth right and the other one the deck is encroaching
into the yard over the yard that's correct as well yes questions from the board
and these we had what was the support from the rco
it was it was a letter of unanimous support okay thank you
questions or comments from our attorney hillary emerson not at this time mr chair
questions or comments from the virtual audience
I see no hints at this time, Chair.
Planning Commission?
Amy Boyd with the Planning Commission.
The comprehensive plan recommends no change in zoning at this location from the existing residential single-family RSA 5.
The proposal is seeking legalization of a roof tag fully within the building's footprint.
The rear yard setback is an existing condition of the building.
The Planning Commission recommends that the Board grant the proposed variance for rear yard setback.
MI 2024-005-840-1314 Darn Street, I vote yes.
Michael Johns, my vote is yes.
Cheryl Gaston, my vote is yes.
Tanetta Graham, my vote is yes.
Eowyn, my vote is yes.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes.
Thank you, Council.
Thank you, Members of the Board. Have a good evening.
Number 15, MI 2024-005-846-2101 South Lambert Street.
Rachel Pritzker is the attorney.
Letter of unanimous support from the Point Breeze Community Development Coalition.
Alpican also provided eight form letters of support.
Good afternoon.
Good afternoon, counsel.
Could you please state your name and spell for the court stenographer?
Yes, Rachel, R-A-C-H-A-E-L, Pritzker, P-R-I-T-Z-K-E-R.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Do you identify your client and the relationship to the property?
Yes, my client is Clarissa Caponera. She is the tenant of the property.
And our vice chair has a few questions.
Good afternoon, counsel. Do you agree to read another refusal or stipulate to its accuracy?
Have you emailed in all the required documents and exhibits as needed to proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing?
Thank you, counsel. Please proceed.
Thank you.
Okay. Can you see my screen?
We can.
Okay. This is the refusal for 2101 South Lambert.
The property is zoned CMX2, and as you can see, this is a referral, not a refusal, so
we are seeking a special exception.
This is for the change of use to public services, body art services, a tattoo shop on the first
floor, no changes to anything else that is previously approved in this building.
This property is zoned CMX2, so body art services is only permitted via special exception
in CMX2. This was our appeal. I'm just going to quickly on Atlas show the board the site.
If you can see, it's a corner property. It has a vacant commercial space. It has had other uses
for commercial in its past, so it is not out of character, and we will be just putting a low-impact
tattoo shop at the corner. It's also worth noting that uniquely the tenant, who's my client,
actually also lives on this block. So she is an integrated member of the neighborhood and
the community here. She lives here as well. So she'll be able to have the tattoo shop right on
the same street in which she lives. This was the lease, as again, she's the tenant of the property.
This is an aerial view just showing the zoning maps.
this is an aerial view just showing the zoning maps most of the
Most of the area is RM1, although they're small lots.
And this is on the corner of Lambert Street and Snyder Avenue,
this CMX2 property here at the corner.
Another aerial view, more aerial views.
And this is just the zoning posters on the property.
As you can see, the ground floor vacant commercial space,
which is where we're looking to put the tattoo shop.
Just a better front view, another view with the zoning posters down the street.
Same thing on this end. This is just where in the code we're required to have a special exception.
As you can see under personal services, body art service requires a special exception.
we met with the community um on monday the 28th um and as mentioned we got a letter of support we
met with um point breeze community development coalition i believe let me just double check
on my notices. Sorry, it's been a long day.
Community Development Coalition?
Yes, I believe so.
We have the mailers that we sent, certified mail,
and then we have our letter of non-opposition.
We had 15 votes total, 9 yes, 0 no.
3 out of the 15 were from near neighbors.
and they kind of provided details about people voting in the same house, et cetera.
But again, we had five yeses, 15 total votes, five yeses, zero noes.
This is just how they do the breakdown.
And we also, the client also did some door knocking to make sure that she informed her
near neighbors about the property, and she submitted letters of support that she got
signed from near neighbors as well.
This one is blank on the address, so we'll ignore that one.
This just shows the history of the property that has had other commercial uses on the ground floor, just so it has had a long standing history of ground floor commercial.
We did put together just some loose floor plans.
We wanted to make sure that we met with the community, kind of show them an idea of the breakdown of the space.
So this is provided to the board as well.
and just some interior photos.
It's a pretty small but nice space.
So it won't require a whole ton of construction, things like that.
Just also wanted to provide the client's CV.
She's been tattooing for many years at this point.
She's going to be having her own spot, which is very exciting for a small business.
And just wanted to show the board some examples of her tattoos and her art as well.
That concludes my presentation.
Again, we're just asking for a special exception for Tattoo Shop Body Art Services.
And if we can bring on Clarissa, if she's still on, to adopt my testimony.
Hi, could you please state your name and spell for the stenographer?
Clarissa Caponera.
That's C-L-A-R-I-S-S-A-C-A-P-O-N-E-R-A.
we're referring to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth
i do please proceed counsel larissa have you heard my testimony today in front of the board
do you believe it to be true and accurate and do you adopt it as your own yes thank you also
chairman i believe someone might be here from councilman johnson's office um as they didn't
submit a letter questions or comments from the virtual uh from the board questions
Questions or comments from our attorney, Hillary Emerson?
Not at this time, Mr. Chair.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
Yes, Chair. I have a hand up.
Yes, sir. I have a hand up by the name of Chris Lynn. They have been allowed to speak.
Could you please state your name and spell for the court stenographer?
Yes, good afternoon, Chairman. My name is Christopher Lynn, C-H-R-I-S-T-O-P-H-E-R, last name Lynn, L-I-N.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Please proceed, sir.
Sure. Thank you. I'm an attorney from Council President Johnson's office, and we're just here to state our support for the project. Thank you.
Thank you very much for taking the time to call us. We appreciate it.
Chairman, sorry to interrupt. I just want to make note, and maybe this is more for Ms. Emerson. The referral says public services, body art services. It's personal services, body art services. I just want to make sure that won't cause an issue.
yes i did i did notice that in the in the description it says public services
in the where it describes the referral it does say personal services so um yeah so when you get
the permit just make sure it has personal services instead of public services on it so yes thank you
thank you mr lynn by the way um is there anyone else in the virtual audience
No, Chair. I see no more hints at this time.
Planning Commission.
I am your Board with the Planning Commission.
The comprehensive plan recommends no change in zoning at this location
from the existing commercial residential mixed-use CMX2.
The appellant has shown that the proposed use would not cause detrimental impacts
beyond what would normally be expected.
The City Planning Commission recommends that the Board grant their proposed
special exemption for personal services, body art service.
Thank you. MI 2024-005-846-2101 South Lambert Street, I vote yes.
Michael Johns, my vote is yes.
Cheryl Gaston, my vote is yes.
Tanetta Graham, my vote is yes.
Iowan, my vote is yes.
Ms. Merrill Shaheed, my vote is yes.
Thank you, counsel.
So, number 16, MI 2024, 005-849-4800 Bingham Street.
Nixon Canet is the attorney.
Unanimous support from the 42nd Ward, RCO.
Vote was seven in support.
Zero opposed.
Hillary, did we get the photos that we needed?
um not to my knowledge mr chair so we do need to see proof of posting before we can proceed
we would need i'd like to see the interior photos right that too okay let's nixon cannot please
yes um mr chair good afternoon good evening good evening to you could you please state your name
and spell for the court stenographer.
Yes, my name is Nixon, N-I-X-O-N,
Connor, K-A-N-N-A-H.
I'm here for the property owner,
Nader Jabbar, 4,800,
Branham Street.
All right, do you swear or affirm
to tell the truth, the whole truth,
and nothing but the truth?
Yes, Mr. Chair.
So, counsel,
we needed interior photos,
and we also needed proof of posting.
And we need to see both of those.
Can I share my screen?
You can.
see the green button on the bottom
yep here you come you're coming up
and do you also have interior photos of the property
I believe, Mr. Nader, yes, I should have some, if it was not in the package, let's see.
Mr. Chair, I don't believe it's interior photos of the, were included in my package.
I think you're asking for
three dwelling units
we would
we would absolutely I think have to see the inside of the property
Hillary do you agree?
That is your call
Mr. Chair I believe there's one photo
looking into the property but other than that
there were no interior photos in the packet
and they were requested.
Counselor, what I think we're going to do
is we're going to continue this.
I'm sorry, but we'd like to leave
the inside of the property, okay?
And the question would be is to the next time,
just, I think somebody contacted looking for this.
Just check with the office.
They'll make sure you have everything in place
and we'll get it going, okay?
Okay, I believe they contacted my client directly
because I don't remember.
Okay, all right.
So then make sure make sure your client knows that he should talk to you and that you definitely because have I received it, I would have I would have gotten I would have been on it.
OK, thank you very much.
We'll we'll we'll try to get you back in as quick as we can.
Thank you, sir.
Take care.
Is there anyone in the first audience whose case has not been called?
I see no hands at this time, too.
So we're going to take a five minute break and we'll come back and we have a short list.
OK, thanks, everybody.
Thanks. Thank you, Chair.
Good afternoon, everyone.
My name is Bill Bergman and I will be chairing
the hearings this afternoon.
With me is our Vice-Chair, Ismail Shahid.
Present, Mr. Chairman.
Our Board Member, Cheryl L. Gaston.
Present, Mr. Chairman.
Our Board Member, Kenetta Graham.
Present, Mr. Chairman.
Board Member, Michael Johns.
Present, Mr. Chairman.
And our board member, Taya Nguyen.
Also present is our attorney, Hillary Emerson, and our Executive Director of Zoning, Ian Haggerty.
Here's our virtual format.
The proceedings are being recorded.
With your participation, you agree to be recorded.
Video will be available by contacting ZBA Executive Director at phila.gov.
For a court stenographer, we ask attorneys and witnesses to identify themselves before testifying.
If you're participating by phone, press star 9 to raise your hand and star 6 to unmute.
To enter an appearance statement, call 267-270-5548.
Leave your email address and the address of the property in question.
And finally, the question answer box on the screen is not for testimony.
All questions should be directed to zbaexecutivedirector at phil.gov.
Let's look at our schedule for this afternoon.
Number five.
Number five, MI 2024-002-932-5625 Thomas Avenue.
Sheen Oliver is the listed applicant.
There's a request from the council person's office for a continuance in this matter.
is the appellant in the audience, Siany Oliver.
I see no one by that name, Chair.
Okay, we're going to, well, okay.
So MI 2024-002-932-5625 Thomas Avenue.
We're going to continue this.
This case must be heard.
And then number one, number one, MI 2023, 002-415-1941 East Tioga Street.
No exhibits, they're listing.
Is Mr. Clinton in the audience?
Yes, sir. Henry Clinton has been allowed to speak.
Good afternoon, Mr. Clinton.
Good afternoon, Mr. Clinton.
Good afternoon, Mr. Chair.
Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman.
Could you just state your name and spell for the court stenographer?
Sure. Henry Clinton, H-E-N-R-Y, Clinton, C-L-I-N-T-O-N.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Mr. Clinton, could you give us an update on this case, please?
Yes. The client has tried to go to neighbors to get some written support for the project.
He hasn't been successful, so I realize it's a third listing.
I'm going to ask if we could have one more continuance, and if we can't produce the signatures, that the case will be dismissed.
Thank you very much.
So MI 2023-002-415-1941, East Tioga Street.
Cases continued.
Case as marked must be heard.
Thank you, Mr. Clinton, for calling us.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Number four
MI 2024
7505 to 07
Brookhaven Road
B'nai Israel
Is the
Is the applicant
No exhibit second listing
No one appeared the first time
I see no one in the audience
So this is the second listing.
No one appeared the first time.
So MI 2024-001-689-7505-07, Brookhaven Road.
I vote to dismiss.
Michael Johns, I vote to dismiss.
Gerald Gaston, my vote is to dismiss.
Tanetta Graham, my vote is to dismiss.
Iowan, my vote is to dismiss.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is to dismiss.
Number six, MI 2024, 004-848, 301 East West Moreland Street.
Ibi Gray Alizabal is the owner, listed applicant, no exhibits, first listing.
I see no one in the audience with that name, Chair.
Okay, thank you. So MI 2024-004-848-301-East Westmoreland Street. Cases continue and mark must be heard.
We're going to go to our first case. Double check here.
okay so oh and one more number two MI 2024 001 675 616 North 2nd Street this case has been
withdrawn number three MI 2024 001 676 1918 East Washington Avenue Devin Upta is the attorney
In unanimous support from the 50th Ward Executive Committee, nine votes in support.
Mr. Chairman, if possible, could you go to the next case and come back to me?
I ran out to move my car in the rain, so I just need five minutes.
Sure, I'll go to the next case and we'll get you at the end.
We only have a few cases.
Thank you.
Okay. It's number seven. MI-2204-004-857-2112 East Somerset Street. Henry Clinton is the attorney.
There's a recommendation of unanimous support from the Somerset Neighbors for Better Living and letter of non-opposition from Council Member Squill.
good afternoon mr clinton good evening rather mr clinton you've already been sworn
um could you just for the record identify yourself sure henry clinton h-n-r-y clinton c-l-i-n-t-o-n
did you identify your client the relationship to the property sure my client is valjeta v-a-l-j-e-t-a
Fonda. F as in Frank
O-N-D-A. She is the
owner of the property. And our
Vice Chair has just a few questions for you,
sir. Good afternoon, Counsel. Do you agree
to waive the reading of the refusal or stipulate
to attack receipt? I do.
Have you emailed in all the required
documents and exhibits needed to proceed
with this case five days in advance of this
hearing? I have.
Thank you, Counsel. Please proceed and share your screen.
Thank you, Mr. Sheehy.
Is that visible, Mr. Chairman?
Is that visible, Mr. Chairman?
It is.
It is.
All right.
Again, good afternoon, Mr. Chairman, members of the board.
I'm Henry Clinton on behalf of Valgetta Fonda.
This concerns a property at 2112 East Somerset Street.
We're asking for a variance to construct a two-family dwelling in a two-story house on a long vacant lot,
which is adjacent to another long vacant lot on a block that has several vacant lots.
um and there are other two family dwellings on the block as i walk through my presentation
i'll explain everything that i just said
the refusal is for use we don't have any uses with height open space rear yard uh it's simply one of
use that this is an rsa5 zoning district and a two-family dwelling is not prohibited in this zoning
district. We do have an RCO letter of support, as the chairman mentioned at the outset. And I just
think it was a tacit acknowledgement that this lot and maybe several others on the block are
going to sit if single family homes are proposed, because there's about 30 homes on the block,
16 are between market value of $130 to $170, the highest priced house on the block. Again,
not to be demeaning. It's just a statement of fact is in about 217,000. So I think that's one
of the reasons why there hasn't been any development on the block in some time.
Here's photographs, an aerial photograph to give you perspective.
Maybe I have to shrink this a little bit.
That's still visible enough, Mr. Chairman?
Yeah, we see.
Yep. So you can see there's we're at 2112, 2110 is vacant. 2114 is a duplex. And there's another duplex on the block that I'll show you at the end. A couple of vacant lots across the street. This is a club of some type. Really, the neighbors really weren't sure what type of club it is. But it is some type of a club. They have a huge parking area in the rear.
This is looking down the block, and here's a club I just pointed out from the aerial view.
Vacant lot on the right, two vacant lots.
This is looking the other perspective.
Property is where I have the black line.
This is an existing two-family dwelling, and I have a zoning record at the end of the presentation.
You can see the two mailboxes on the door.
These are deep lots.
The lots are about 75 feet deep, so it allows for a larger home on the property, which is ample for a two-family dwelling.
Notice of our posting.
Here are the plans.
So to the left, I'll just start on the left-hand side.
This is the site map.
Again, the lot's 75 feet deep.
The house is about 55 feet deep.
What's unique about this particular lot is in the rear.
We actually have a door.
You can see this in the third photograph where my cursor is.
A door leading from the basement up the steps and into the rear yard.
The front will be all brick with an egress well, and then stairs leading up to the first floor.
The back will be a metal siding vertical.
floor plan uh excuse me floor plan now my client the plans show a bedroom in the basement and a
bathroom but she told me that the architect made a mistake she does not want to have a bedroom in
the basement or a bathroom. So it does say preliminary. So if we have a proviso, if the
board looks kindly upon this, we would ask that proviso to reflect no bedroom or bathroom in the
basement. This is a relatively modest proposal in terms of a number of bedrooms. First floor
will have one bedroom, large kitchen, living area, one bathroom. The front door would then
lead you to the second floor where there would be two bedrooms and two baths. There's no rooftop
deck. There's no decks in the rear. Again, trying to fit in with the character of the neighborhood.
Application for appeal, project information form, tax clearance. This requires some explanation. So
if you look at the tax records, the only taxes that my client owes is for 2025 and they're not
yet do. When we tried to print out the tax clearance, this is the first time I've ever
seen this. It said unable to view certificate. So she doesn't know any real estate taxes and
She doesn't know any real estate taxes and no other taxes that we know of, but I don't have a certificate to show the board, only to say at the top, tax clearance check for zoning board passed.
no other taxes that we know of.
You can view the certificate now or review it later in your letters, but for whatever reason, it just would not print out.
Zoning map, again, RSA 5 zoning district.
The deed indicating ownership by Ms. Fonda.
This is a notice we sent out to everyone within 250 feet of the property.
This is our certification that everything was actually mailed, 100 pieces of mail.
All the addresses, Martha Street, Amber Street, Rush Street.
And these are the two family dwellings on the street.
One is 2114, immediately adjacent to our property.
and then 2135, which is across the street.
And again, this is two units
and it's an active rental property.
That is the presentation.
I just like to summarize it
that we have a long vacant lot.
I wasn't as able to establish how long,
but some members of the community
thought it was at least a decade
or perhaps longer.
we have other two family dwellings on the block single family homes in terms of construction
costs would be prohibitive to build my client only has three bedrooms if it were a single
family home it would also have three bedrooms so we're not really bringing more individuals
to the block or more congestion the two family dwelling is necessary for the viable economic
use of the property. It is in harmony with the code as it is residential. It's in harmony with
the community. We're not impacting any light or air or the development of any adjacent property.
In fact, the property to the right is vacant, and perhaps our project will spur on the development
of that particular lot. And with that, I'd ask my client to unmute herself. Ms. Fonda,
can you raise your hand? She may be participating in my telephone.
Valjeta Fonda has been allowed to speak.
How could you please state your name and spell for the stenographer?
Yes, my name is Valjeta Fonda, V-A-L-J-E-T-A, last name Fonda, F-O-N-D-A.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, told truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Please proceed, Mr. Clinton.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Ms. Fonda, were you on this call when I presented your two-story, two-family project to the board?
Yes, I was.
And if you had the opportunity to testify, would you adopt my testimony as your own and as true and correct?
Yes, I do.
Thank you, Ms. Fonda.
Questions from the board.
Questions from the board.
A question.
You're not, the client doesn't want to do basement living, correct?
Correct.
And so are you still going to have a basement?
Are you still planning to have a basement or no?
Yes, Mr. Johns, there will still be a basement,
but that will just be for recreation or maybe a playroom.
She has it marked here as recreation.
So there's no living in the basement.
Even though there's a door and a walk out into the yard,
I asked her repeatedly, and she advised me,
She doesn't want to have a bedroom or a bathroom in the basement.
Can you tell me how tall the building would be in relation to the other houses that are adjacent to it?
Ms. Graham, it's going to be 29 feet.
And I don't have a rendering of what's next door.
Let me see something here.
I do know at the top of the building, there's a cornice line here, which I think was meant that the brick or turn like a row lock to carry over the cornice line from the adjacent buildings.
Let me pull them up.
So 29 feet, it's well below the 38 feet.
I can only guesstimate the height of the buildings on either side, and I don't want to guesstimate wrong to tell you the truth.
Thank you.
other questions from the board what's the width of the lot the width of the lot is 18 feet okay
thank you questions or comments from our attorney hillary emerson
at this time mr chair
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
questions or comments from the virtual audience i see no
I see no hands at this time, Chair.
Planning Commission.
Good evening, Chair Bergman and board members.
My name is Nina Solomonic, and I'm with the Planning Commission.
Nina, could you spell your name for the court stenographer?
Yes, Nina, N-I-N-A, last name Solomonic, S-O-L-O-M-O-N-I-C.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Please proceed.
This property is indicated for residential single-family on the city plan, and our adopted district plan recommended no change to the existed zoning at this location.
There is no unique physical condition of this property that would prevent it from being used in conformance with the zoning code.
Therefore, the Planning Commission recommends that the board deny the requested variance.
number seven what mr clinton if you want me to address that mr chairman i will sure you sure you
can yeah just as i mentioned in the presentation uh this is a large lot 18 by 75 it's been
undeveloped for a minimum of a decade and potentially longer uh the market values of
the properties on the street exceed the cost of construction for a single family home but it makes
more economic sense for a two-family home and there are other existing two-family homes on the
on the block including the one adjacent to our proposal. Thank you. MI 2204-004-857-2112 East
Somerset Street. I vote yes with no basement living. Michael Johns. My vote is yes with
proviso. Cheryl Gaston, my vote is yes, with proviso. Tanetta Graham, my vote is yes, with proviso.
Irwin, my vote is yes, with proviso. Ishmael Shahid, my vote is yes, with proviso. Thank you,
Council. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Number eight, MI 2024-006-660-8301 Tarsdale Avenue,
Darwin Bovee is the attorney.
There's recommendation of unanimous support from the Upper Holmesburg Civic Association.
24 votes in support.
Mr. Chairman, members of the board.
Council, I think I already sworn you at one point today, somewhere along the line.
Yes, she did, and I swore never to lie to this board.
Could you please state your name just for the record?
Darwin Bovee, B-E-A-U-V-A-I-S, attorney for the applicant, the Rockefeller Group.
If I can...
And our vice chair has just a few questions for you, sir.
Good afternoon, counsel.
Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal or stipulate towards accuracy?
Yes, I do.
Have you emailed in all the required documents and exhibits as needed to proceed with this case
five days in advance of this hearing? Yes, I have. Thank you,
Counselor. Please proceed and you can share your screen. Okay.
Let me try this again.
I'm not the most tech-savvy
person.
I believe it's here.
can you see that we can make it just a little bit bigger okay there
all right Mr. Chairman members of the board right can we also identify for later on Jacqueline
Schwartz and Heath Abramson, they are with the Rockefeller Group, and also Keith Tindall from
Sabre Industries, who will be my very quick witness. Before you is an application on behalf
of the Rockefeller Group, a New York metropolitan area development company, which has entered the
Philadelphia market with a transformative project at 8301 Toursdale Avenue, which is in the
northeast section of philadelphia the project includes the construction of 190 000 plus square
foot warehouse which is permitted as of right and the relocation of an existing wireless facility
a cell phone tower from the center of the lot to now the rear of the lot which is the essence of
to now the rear of the lot which is the essence of this application now by way of background
this application now by way
we did submit uh our exhibits which includes our refusal all the way down to uh aerials
our memorandum of law and photos of the of the property as well as the posting
i would like to bring your attention to exhibit five just start there
this is this is a rendering or a render site plan of our warehouse over and on the right
hand corner is the subject of our application which is the cell phone tower just want to give
you a aerial along here where the cursor is towards dell avenue and in the rear are railroad tracks
directly behind us n95 and if you remember how we how the our lot is configured it's surrounded by
the red line and this is where our cell phone tower is along the right of the screen is the infamous
upper homesburg prison and you don't see it here because this is a rendering but currently our
cell phone tower is somewhere around here so the and and i just want to correct the record it's i
believe the applicant all those rockefeller group it's rg or rg torsdale llc that's the actual
applicant. So just by way of background, the cell phone tower is here. So this is a photo,
the prison sitting on property. So you see that emblem right here. And it is this tower that
we're seeking our variants from. Now we're proposing a new tower, which will be more
modern structure. And the difference between this tower that you see on your screen and the tower
that we're proposing is that it can accommodate a much smaller fall zone radius. Our refusal
basically stands that if your tower is whatever height it is, it's assuming that the tower is
going to fall. It's going to fall and that it needs that entire radius for it to fall.
That was then. This is now. We don't need two hundred and fifty three feet for a fall zone.
And the fact that and couple that with we're taking this tower and we're putting it in the rear of the property.
I think that makes better use and better efficiency for the property overall.
So with that, I just I'm looking for the board to grant our application basically for four reasons.
One, the physical layout of the property. Our unique physical constraints makes compliance infeasible. Like I mentioned before, you can look again. This is a much better location for a cell phone tower as opposed to here in the middle of the lot.
um by by by doing anything else i think this will slow this will make it a more inefficient
site to the point that we cannot cannot develop what we're developing what we already are
permitted for two the next the the next reason why we believe the board should grant our
Variant is that relocating the tower makes sense right here, but also the tower, modern-day technology has the tower collapsing.
And with that, I just want to show this is an elevation of the proposed tower.
And if we can identify Keith Tindall, he is the engineer that can speak to how the tower collapsed.
Keith Tindall has been allowed to speak.
Could you please state your name spelled for the stenographer?
Can you hear me?
Yes, I can.
Could you please spell your name for the stenographer?
Yes, my name is Keith Tyndall, J-E-I-T-H.
Keith, I think you have to turn off your…
You've got two devices on, Keith.
Try now, Keith.
Try now, Keith.
I'm still getting my phone back.
Maybe walk away from the computer.
Keith?
How about now?
Better.
Okay, good.
Tell your name, please.
All right.
My name's Keith Tindall.
K-E-I-T-H-A-T-I-N-D-A.
I hear it.
Well, let me just get you.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
All right.
We've got to figure out where to get that.
So you have your phone and computer on?
Computer's on.
I think the audio's off now.
Just a second.
or if i may the mr chairman that i could summarize his testimony for you i want to
you want to do that then please you know we we hired saber technologies right they were the ones
that actually put together this tower elevation to show that the the that the design and if you
can look at my cursor there are points in which the the the tower will have breaking points and
almost and i would say almost like collapsible cups it will fall onto itself so given that if
we're in a hurricane the bottom will not will not give way initially because as the winds will fly
If it gets to a certain point, there will be breakage, but it will collapse onto itself. And that full collapsing only gives us a 50-yard radius. So we are comfortable with this technology.
um they the saber technologies uh uh uh has has done wonderful jobs throughout the country
with this type of uh technology but i think we should be able to um uh rest assured that
that will the product that they're putting together will be the same as they had intended
which is that it will break off and will sit at no more than a 50-foot radius.
So I believe that's what Keith Tindall would have said,
and I think that's something that the board should take into consideration.
Our third issue, which we believe the board will feel comfortable granting this variance, is the community. The community has expressed a strong support for our project, including the proposed relocation of the tower, as well as the overall project.
This support was championed by Councilman Mike Driscoll, who led the efforts to engage all the stakeholders and secure consensus for both the warehouse and the tower of relocation.
We have been meeting with the Councilman for over a year, discussing the overall warehouse and the community impact.
And as such, moving the tower to the rear of the lot aligns with the community preferences and ensures the site's development benefits the neighborhood.
And we thank the councilman for his involvement. And you could see on our exhibit that he did give us a letter of support.
Now, our fourth reason really deals with the fact that we have no negative impact on the surrounding property or the neighborhood.
Our relocation enhances the parcel while maintaining the essential function of a cell phone tower, which provides critical telecommunications infrastructure for business, residents, and emergency services.
We submit that this project reflects a thoughtful approach to balancing industrial development with infrastructure needs and community priorities by enabling the efficient use of the site and granting the variance, we further submit that we satisfy Section 303AE of the zoning code, as well as creating positive economic development in the Northeast.
Now, I want to conclude by saying, again, our physical constraints with the property combined with the advanced safety features of the tower and the overwhelming support for the project.
Now, I want to conclude by saying, again,
I think it's pretty compelling that giving us relief will not have a negative impact and will actually be a positive thing for the community.
If I may, can I call on Jacqueline Schwartz?
If she could be identified.
Jacqueline Schwartz has been allowed to speak.
Could you please state your name and spell for the court stenographer?
Jacqueline Schwartz, J-A-C-Q-U-E-L-I-N-E.
Last name Schwartz, S-C-H-U-S-C-H-E.
Can you do that one more time? Break it off a little bit. Do it one more time.
Sure. J-A-C-Q-U-E-L-I-N-E-S-C-H-W-A-R-T-Z.
I affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
Please proceed, counsel.
Thank you. Jacqueline, can you state your position in terms of the Rockefeller Group?
Sure. I'm an associate on the development team for Rockefeller Group.
Applicant name for this project is R.G. Toursdale, LLC.
Okay. And you heard everything I said today, and would you adopt that as your own testimony?
Yes. I just wanted to clarify, I think a couple of things were lost in translation with some of the technical difficulties.
So the tower that we are proposing is designed to withstand high velocity winds, a less than 1% chance of those wind events actually happening in this area. They have not happened to date. And the tower is designed to have a 50-foot fall zone.
Thank you. Mr. Chairman, that concludes my presentation.
Questions? Thank you.
Questions from the board.
Yeah, I have a question.
Can we go back to the site plan?
Can you tell me what the, what's the other one?
What's the other one?
What's that one?
Yeah, the one, the color.
can you tell me what the the circle is around the uh in the triangle this is 250 feet
that's 253 feet okay and then the triangle
what's what's that and then the smaller circle is that the 50 foot that is the 50 foot okay
and then the triangle is what we were just showing um uh actually i believe it was just showing
uh i believe it's a hundred foot radius that's all okay so it was just showing
what we look like in comparison gotcha and so that inner circle is the 50 foot
Yeah. Yes. And just for the board, I just want you to realize we are this area and maybe the photos can show.
So I think this is, this was a combination junkyard and repair mechanic haven.
So walking through the sites, and when we did this with the councilmen, as well as, and I think some of the neighbors, neighborhood leadership, it was an environmental mess.
And this was the lot that was for sale.
But even along here, it's also, I'm not going to say junkyard, but it's also an auto mechanic haven.
i will say that as well so again we feel comfortable that this is the right decision
the community feels comfortable that this is the right condition we've um here
here are photos entering the site with the original cell phone tower
Entering the site with the original cell phone tower, just pull back a little photos before we, we started demolition.
These are some of the structures that used to be on the site.
This is near the railroad tracks.
this is near the rear and now what
and all of this has been demolished so far this is torsdale avenue
this is some of the stuff we found inside
Mind you, these structures aren't there.
This is us clearing the site.
And these are just photos of our posting.
And that is it.
Unless there's any other questions, I can bring it back up.
Other questions from the board?
It says here that it's a freestanding tower and building or tower-mounted antennas.
Which is it?
Well, it's both because it's creating the structure,
And then it's creating, adding antennas on the structure.
But it says freestanding tower and building or tower mounted antennas.
So I understand you're building the tower.
So these will be tower mounted antennas, not building.
There won't be towers on the building.
Or are you planning to do both?
No, I, this is, let me get back to, and I'm just getting this from the summary, you know.
yeah so is that
here's the tower there are structures here that we're going to have to support the tower
all right there's there's a 10 10 foot 10 foot 5 inches by 20 foot shelter
this is the pad okay so the i it's it technology is wonderful and and what we're proposing is this
tower that will have a lot of support on there because the goal is to not only support t-mobile
or AT&T, but also
emergency services
as well. Yeah, you're going to
co-locate. Yes.
The antennas. But they
won't be on the building. They will
be on this tower. Correct.
Okay. All right.
Thank you. Darwin,
just a real quick question. And I
understand about if it
collapses and all that. What about the
antennas? Are they windproof?
I mean, how do they secure
the antennas on top of the towers?
That's a good question. And if Keith is still available, he might be the best person to answer that.
Is Keith still around?
Yes. Keith Tindall has been allowed to speak.
Keith.
keith can you hear me yes there he is
he's already been sworn did you hear the question
we can't hear you keith
so so while he's and he can corroborate this okay hold on now oh there he is yeah go ahead
I'm going to hang up my phone. Can you hear me now?
Yeah, go ahead.
Keith, the question was asked about the antennas being mounted onto the tower.
Keith, the question was asked about the antennas.
Okay. Can you hear me?
All right. Yeah, the antennas, we have antenna mounts that we provide with the tower.
So they stand the antennas off maybe three feet, depending on which mount it is.
And then the antennas themselves get you bolted to pipes that are part of those mounts.
So it's all structural steel up there that's supporting everything, and we've designed it all for way more than what's required at this site.
Thank you.
Any other questions from the board?
I have a quick question.
Does the collapsible nature of this tower allow for, like, future growth?
Like, what if you need to include more antennas or whatever?
Does the collapsible nature limit that, or is it a flexible-type tower?
No, it doesn't limit it, actually.
Yeah, the tower is designed for three carriers with all of their future loading, you know, not just what they're putting on there initially.
So it's designed for more square footage than what they'll put on initially.
And so even with all those three carriers and 114 mile an hour wind, you know, the tower is designed to support all of that.
So the wind would have to exceed 114 miles an hour for that for that collapsible mechanism to kick in.
With all those with all those future carrier loadings on.
Thank you. Sure.
Questions or comments from our attorney, Hillary Emerson.
I just wanted to clarify one point. It looks like on the refusal, what they did is there's a use category called wireless service facility. So they put that on there and they listed both of the subcategories, which is freestanding towers and building or tower mounted antennas.
It sounds like both are applicable in this case.
So that's why they listed both of the specific use types within the use category.
So I think that's what happened with the refusal and why it's written a little bit.
It seems a little bit confusing.
Thank you.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
I see no hands at this time, Chair.
Planning Commission.
Planning?
Oh, sorry.
I thought I was unmuted.
No, that's fine.
That's fine.
Good evening.
My name is Nina Salmonic, and I'm with the Planning Commission.
This proposal completed its civic design review in October 2023.
The Civic Design Review Committee's 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 zoning at this location from existing medium industrial I-2.
The appellant has demonstrated that the proposed relocation of the cell tower location will not cause detrimental impacts beyond what would be reasonably expected.
The Planning Commission recommends the board grant the requested variance for the removal and relocation of a cell tower structure.
Thank you. MI 2024.
Sorry, this is Hillary. Just a point of clarification for Nina.
you said this particular application went through cdr or was there another part of the project that
went through cdr because i didn't think a cell phone tower in and of itself would go through cdr
uh that's correct the building portion and the site went through cdr okay so that was a separate
application yes okay all right thank you i was with you i understand
MI 2024-006-660-8301-Torrisdale Avenue, I vote yes.
Michael Johns, my vote is yes.
Cheryl Gaston, my vote is yes.
Tana Graham, my vote is yes.
Iowyn, my vote is yes.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes.
Dari, thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you.
Members of the board, happy holidays.
Okay, same to you.
Thank you.
So number three, MI 2024-001-676-1918 East Washington Lane.
Devin Obduck is the attorney.
Letter of unanimous support from the 50th Ward Democratic Executive Committee.
Letter of unanimous support from the 50th Ward Democratic Executive Committee.
Counsel?
Thank you there, Mr. Chairman.
Your vote has been sworn, Counsel. Could you just state your name for the record, please?
Yes, Devin Uqda, D-E-V-I-N Uqda, U-Q-D-A-H.
Counsel, could you identify your client, the relationship to the property?
Yes, I have one of the owners on the call, Mr. Ronald Bridges.
Okay, our vice chair has a few questions for you.
Good evening, counsel. Do you agree to weigh the reason of the refusal or stipulate to its accuracy?
Have you e-mailed in all the required documents and exhibits that is needed to proceed with this case 5 days in advance of this hearing?
Yes. Well, I uploaded some after getting feedback, what I was missing, but I can re-upload anything that's missing.
I believe we received everything, but please share your screen and proceed.
can you see my screen it should be coming up any minute i see it's yet i see it now
all right it's not scrolling down i share my screen every share one second i apologize
Thank you.
coming up now all right that's better okay uh so the address of this property is 1918
east washington lane philadelphia pa 19138 um it's a table of contents of all the information
i present in my presentation it's been uploaded to the website um so here we have a letter of
referral. The proposed use is eating and drinking establishment. It's going to be a takeout
restaurant. Requires exception approval for zoning board adjustments.
So here we just have some pictures of the surrounding area. So this property is on
Washington Lane between Thoron and Lodkin Pike. The entire block, as you will see,
is pretty much all commercial.
There's like, the property used to be a hair salon.
I think next to it is a salon, ice cream shops
and restaurants and delis
and across the streets like dollar stores
and doctor's offices.
So again, it's Washington Lane
between Thoron and Lampkin Pike.
As you can see, the property is currently CMX2.
All of the properties on the block
actually are also CMX2 as well.
So, this is the property right here.
This is 1918 East Washington Lane.
To the right of it, as I mentioned, is the ice cream shop.
I'm sorry. Yes, to the right of it is ice cream shop.
To the left of it is a breakfast restaurant.
Again, all of the other properties on the block are CMX2.
Most of them have some type of residential living on the second floor.
This is the back of the property.
This is a picture of the posting on a property.
Here are some internal pictures of the property.
So probably even cleaned out.
It's going to be a full rehab.
So this is just a picture of it cleaned out.
Pretty much got it.
The picture of the inside of the property.
Now the picture is lost.
This is the first floor.
So the picture of me,
the picture of me showing the posting would be on
the other side of these windows.
this is the first floor and then these steps over here to the left will go down to the basement
the steps here would also go up to the second floor
so standing in front of property across the street there is a
large parking lot a dollar store dialysis a daycare and a doctor's office
a daycare and a doctor's office
um so now just getting into the drawings um so the property now
is still maintaining the same height um it's two two levels it's by level um
there'll be a takeout restaurant on the first floor
um the second floor it would have will be residential um
so it's the first the first floor to see some expansion on the windows
uh two doors one to go upstairs one to go into like the restaurant area into the basement
is multiple pictures outside
so here we have what we're looking at the inside so this this would be the basement
um the basement would have storage toilet room hvac hookup um some prep area and then the first
floor this would be the door you walk into the first door down here this part is like a takeout
restaurant section so you would order pay for stuff here uh proposed kitchen freezer food prep
all on the first floor this would be the second floor so the second floor would be
uh a kitchen a living area it's uh set up it will be set up to have two bedrooms and uh two bathrooms
Again, more and more reference to the drawings.
This is the first floor,
like the first floor of the restaurant area.
So this would be the counters.
If you were coming in from the front,
this is the counter and then this back here would be the back part of
the restaurant where you propose food prep and storage.
Some notice to the RCO.
Proof of mailing.
We also did mailing and we also just knocked on all the neighbors on
the block that then just also notified them and dropped off the mailing list as well.
It's a deed to the property.
This is clear to show that there's no real estate taxes owed on a property.
Then this is the letter of support from the RCO.
10 people in attendance we all had all the vote in support of it
and that concludes my presentation um i have the one of the owners on a call
possible could i have him uh could i recognize him uh ronald bridges
bridges has been allowed to speak
good evening sir could you please state your name and spell for the stenographer
ronald bridges r-o-n-a-l-d b-r-i-d-g-e-s you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth
nothing but the truth i affirm please proceed counsel uh mr bridges were you able to hear my
presentation yes sir um do you verify that it was true and accurate yes sir and um do you adopt my
statements yes sir um questions from the board yes i have one quick question i'm sorry um that the
is there a bathroom for the restaurant was that that the bathroom that was in the basement no so
that bathroom would be for staff right but is it one on the first floor as well yes one on the basement
On the first floor as well.
Okay, thank you.
There are no bathrooms shown on your plane.
On the first floor.
By mistake, there's not a bathroom because it's only takeout.
So they would just come in and not go past the counter.
So it's just a basement bathroom for the staff.
Okay, thank you.
That's what I thought I saw.
okay so uh what kind of food are we going to be serving here and is it the type that might
require some sort of venting so they are going to be installed in that hvac um system and the
property is which is here here on the left um i'm not sure if they've established the the menu for
the restaurant, I think that that may be open to the tenant who occupies the property.
Okay. But if it's, okay, depending on what kind of food you may be, if this is like
food that's going to require any kind of venting, have you, is there anything about that on these
plans um no so we don't have any vents here on this
um no so we don't have any vents here on this um if the if they do decide to do that i guess we
would have to pull the permits to do something like that well the the the your plan shows a
number of fixtures that will require venting yes or a fryer a grill a griller yeah and another
piece of equipment we require
planting and so
Can you hear me? This is
Ronald Bridges speaking
Go ahead Mr. Bridges. There is a hood
system in the plans
Okay yeah because you're required
to have an ANSOL system and a hood system
Yes sir we will have an ANSOL system
it's in the plans
I think what
Member
Assurel was
kind of alluding to is if you're
you've got you've got to have these have you have these fixtures that need to be vented
what's the plan to vent and my request is that it be vented through the roof and not out the side
that's what i would prefer as well um but i'm not seeing that on these plants and that's where
my concern is. Thank you.
Mr. Purchase,
can you answer that?
Yes, the hood is venting over all
of the cooking equipment.
The hood will be venting through the roof on the left-hand
Where is this on this
plane here?
It's hard for me to
But it will be
it's a little small i'm trying to
can you go to the elevation page sheet
okay so you shut the venting out the roof yep all right okay thank you
okay any other questions questions or comments from our attorney hillary oh i'm sorry i'm sorry
although you do show a secondary event it looks up here to be at the first at the first floor level
correct
so I think
that's an issue
particularly since you've got
a window if you look at this
elevation you've got a window that's
right here
right behind where that
vent is coming through the roof
the desire
would have that vent
above the second floor
in my opinion
because you're going to have exhaust fumes
and if somebody opens the window there
it's going to blow right in their window.
Better if it's through the roof.
Correct.
Or above the roof, right?
Yeah, or above the roof, yes.
Somebody's putting in the exhaust fan
from another side of the building.
That's the intake fan
on a lower level.
okay so that's an intake i can't read on the elevation it's it's it's two fans the other
fan will be it's a different one fan is on a roof on a left hand side and you got you can't see that
i can't expand this i got it i mean if it was zoomed in i think we'd be able to read i think
we're all familiar with the system we just can't read the notes at the scale right
sorry i'm trying to just zoom in a little bit oh i see it says new intake fan okay so that's an
intake fan and then the exhaust uh fan roof is above the roof okay good all right okay okay all
right thank you yeah questions or comments from our attorney hillary emerson um just a quick note
uh mr i don't believe the interior photos that you showed were sent to the board at least i
I couldn't find a record of them, so please upload those by the end of the day tomorrow
so that they can be included in the record for this case.
Thank you.
Yes, ma'am.
No problem.
I think my only question is about egress from the basement.
Is there egress well in the basement or door access?
Yes, there's a door access in front of the building.
To the basement?
Yes, like a building.
And from the first floor, there's access to the basement.
No, I understand inside.
Oh, I'm talking about on the exterior.
Yeah, it's like right here.
I'm trying to see. They're so tiny. Oh, okay. That's the rear. All right.
I'm trying to see.
They're so tiny.
Oh, okay, that's the rear.
All right.
You know, go.
You know, bill code doors, you open the thing up and...
Yeah, yeah, yeah. I just couldn't. I can't see it.
Yeah, she can't see the bill code door. That's all.
Bigger planning.
I'll choose your comments from the virtual audience.
I see no hands at this time, Chair.
Planning Commission.
Good evening again. My name is Nina Salamonik, and I am with the Planning Commission.
The comprehensive plan recommends no change to the existing CMX-2 commercial mixed-use zoning.
The proposed takeout restaurant use will not cause detrimental impacts to the neighborhood beyond what might normally be expected.
Therefore, the Planning Commission recommends that the Board grant the requested special exception.
MI 2024-001-676-1918, East Washington Lane, I vote yes.
Michael Johns, my vote is yes.
Carol Gaston, my vote is yes.
Tanada Graham, my vote is yes.
Ayewin, my vote is yes.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes.
Thank you, counsel.
Thank you.
You can, sure.
Is there anyone in the virtual audience whose case has not been called?
I see no means at the time, Sharon.
Thanks, everyone.
Let's go home, relax, sit.
sit back and thanks to everybody by the way good night oh well thank you chair
thank you thank you to planning thank you have a good evening good night