so you tell me when you're ready we are all ready now and um people are just starting to come in
Okay, so I can start.
Yeah, I know we usually do that, that's why I'm asking.
Yes, you could wait just a few minutes.
Okay, it seems like our participants have been around 50 studies, so I think that most
people are probably here by now okay good morning my name is carol tenary and i'm the vice chair of
the zoning board of adjustment i will be conducting the hearings today along with
board secretary confessor plaza and board members thomas holliman and james snell
and then i just went blank our board attorney sharon saletta is also in attendance for those
you who haven't yet participated in one of our virtual hearings, I'll go through some of the
basics of what you can expect. First, we will be administering oaths to individual participants
prior to their testimony. Second, I'd like to advise everyone that this proceeding is being
recorded and that by participating you acknowledge your agreement to be recorded. Third, for anyone
participating by phone, if you wish to testify, you must raise your hand by hitting star nine,
then star six to unmute yourself. And I'll repeat that as the chair does. If anyone is participating
by phone, if you wish to testify, you must raise your hand by hitting star nine,
then star six to unmute yourself. Finally, to enter an appearance statement, call Google
267 -270 -5548 and leave your email address and the address of the property at issue.
That's 267 -270 -5548. And fourth, the question and answer box, the chat, is not for testimony.
It is only going to be used for today's hearings and strike only going to be used for today's hearings.
Any comments are to be directed to Fatina.
the continuances today are calendar number one zero eight two 1714 North Bouvier Street Bouvier
Street. Number eight, calendar number 1165 -4249 Cotman Avenue. Number 11, calendar number 0203 -5386
Chu Avenue and number 16 calendar number 0021 -7956 Kester Avenue does anyone object to any of those
continuances and if so please raise your hand I see no here hands by shift thank you
is there anyone requesting a continuance or withdrawal now please raise your hand
sloan folks i have unmuted you you're free to speak
good morning vice chair ternary good morning how are you how are you great good uh my name
is Sloan Folks, S -L -O -A -N -E -F -S -F -I -R -O -L -K -S, Office of Councilwoman Maria Quinones -Sanchez,
room 508 City Hall. Okay, do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its
accuracy? No, we're not doing that. Strike that. No, ma 'am. Do you swear or affirm? See, Sharon,
do you swear or affirm to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth? Yes, I do. Thank you,
you're requesting a continuance for yes requesting two continuances uh for um uh list number three
calendar number mi2020 -0002941635 east shilliam avenue they have not met with the rco and we
would like for them to like for the community to put on the process okay and there are also no
exhibits. And this was previously listed for October 14.
and this was previously listed for october 14th and the second request that we have is for count
one second oh i'm sorry i'm sorry i'm sorry one second um to the uh attorney for the board
is this a continuance um you should confirm that no one from representing the applicant is there
is anyone representing the applicant here
vice chair I have Mr. Colavita hand raised
okay on 1635 East Sheltonham Avenue
no his hand is just one down sorry I have Craig
first name Craig hand raised yeah good morning this is Craig Melodosian from Ward 40
Republican RCO okay you here for Sheltonham Avenue no she asked me to unmute I'm here for
another case. Okay, I'm still on 1635 East Sheltonham Avenue. I want to see if there's
anyone here on that case. No hands. That case 1635 East Sheltonham Avenue, calendar number
0294 is going to be dismissed. Excuse me, all members will have to vote on the dismissal.
vice chair we have one more we have a hand up from a caller a calling i just unmuted okay
name hello can you put your name and address on the record please yes can you hear me okay
hello can you hear me okay yes i can hear you okay thanks my name is adrian fernandez
Toronto Neighborhood Possibles Association and I'm calling to ask or confirm that there's a
continuance granted for 2215. Adrienne are you here for 1635 East Cheltenham Avenue?
The board is in the middle of voting this case for right now if only anyone here for 1635
Cheltenham is please raise your hand otherwise let's get through these cases first.
so sheltonham has been dismissed uh mr folks you did not get halfway through the vote if
everyone could vote that again okay calendar number zero two nine four sixteen thirty five
east sheltonham avenue this case is dismissed dismissed dismissed
Smith? Mr. Foulkes had another request. He did. Mr. Foulkes, please unmute yourself.
Thank you very much. I didn't see that. I realized I was unmuted.
number nine on your list calendar number mi2020 -000440 -4602 frankfort avenue the same
the same stipulation they have not met the rco and which we wish for them to for them to have
input on the in the variance process okay and this case also has no exhibits and it was listed
October 14th is there anyone here on that case I have one hand up from a calling user
are you here for this case user if not lower your hand please
I'm going to unmute them if I share thank you sorry for all that movement that I was going
through but i'm trying to block out the sound of the sirens okay caller you've been unmuted you may
speak is anyone there who wishes to speak on 4602 frankfort avenue i see no other hand by share
okay calendar number 0440 4602 frankfort avenue this case is dismissed dismissed dismissed
thank you very much board
Thank you.
thank you
Are there any other requests for continuances or withdrawals?
I'm going to unmute Mr. Craig now.
Sir, please unmute yourself.
You're free to speak.
Good morning. This is Craig Melodosian from the Ward 40 Republican RCOs on behalf of the Southwest Philadelphia Consortium of RCOs. In the matter of meeting ID number 0292 -7126, Yocum Street, we originally received notification from RCO on 3 -16 -2020.
20. As of this point, we can't find any email communication with the applicant. We have no
copies of the template of notification. There's no posting on the front of the building, and one
near neighbor who's a member of Ward 48 Republicans, also one of the affected RCOs, has no awareness
of this application. So in light of that, we would at least ask for a continuation in this manner.
On 7126, we also have no exhibits and it was pre -listed. So, is there anyone here other
than you on this case? And if so, please raise your hand.
Vice Chair, I have one caller calling user that I'm going to unmute right now.
Thank you.
You're welcome.
You're free to speak, caller.
Please unmute yourself.
I'm holding for a different address.
I'm still holding on.
If you're not here for this case, please, I'm going to lower your hands, all hands.
please raise your hand if you're only calling in for this case
and the case is 7126 yocum street
i see no hinge by share thank you calendar number 0292 7126 yocum street this case is dismissed
dismissed dismissed dismissed thank you madam tenere and board we appreciate your your help
Thanks Craig. I'm sorry. We have Charles Richardson. He's been unmuted. Please unmute yourself, sir.
Good morning, Madam Vice Chair and board members. Charles Richardson from the Office of Councilwoman
Cindy Bass, room 312 City Hall. Calling with regard to
2215 West Tioga Street, which is 0375, which is number six on your list.
I got a notification from Sharon yesterday that there's no exhibits that were turned in,
and this was previously listed, so we're asking for a continuance.
Is there anyone here on this case? If so, please raise your hand.
i see no hands vice chair thank you calendar number zero three seven five
twenty two fifteen west tayoga street this case is dismissed dismissed dismissed
thank you are there any other requests you're welcome are there any other requests
for continuances or withdrawals and if so please raise your hand i have mr colavita
you may unmute yourself sir you're free to speak good morning good morning this is in calendar
number mi 2020 000 295 premises is 622 north front street this matter is being withdrawn
on thank you calendar number 0295 622 north front street is withdrawn okay and and just to confirm
i had five other matters on a reconsideration just wanted to confirm that all documents were
received on 1710 well excuse me this is sharon sletter mr colavita they were um received and
the vote will be at the start of the 3 30 session so that uh chairman de chico can participate and
also on front street if you have not yet done it could you send in a letter requesting the
continuance so that we have it for the file or rather the withdrawal absolutely i've been trying
Absolutely. I've been trying to get through to my client to ask to get it in writing, but I've gotten verbal confirmation that he wanted withdrawn, but I will do so.
to get through to my client to ask to to get it in in uh
Okay. Thank you.
You're welcome. Bye.
Okay. Anyone else requesting a continuance or withdrawal?
I see no hands, Vice Chair.
Okay, did Ms. Fernandez ever get a chance
to request the continuance?
I see one hand up, one call -in user hand up now.
I can unmute.
Thank you.
Paula, you've been unmuted.
Please unmute yourself.
Hello, this is Ms. Fernandez.
And I just wanted to let you know that the address
that i was i wrote about and also and i'm talking about is 2215 with title good which was dismissed
okay thank you so much thank you
okay moving along is there anyone else i see no other hands vice chair thank you
So, calendar number 2588100 West Duval, calendar number 2589102 West Duval Street, and calendar
number 257231 West Duval Street will be voted at 330 so the chair can participate in this
next case calendar number 36536 1317 south 15th street this case was remanded by common police
court can the attorney weigh in on this um excuse me chair vice chair this was remanded um you
originally approved the variance for three -unit multi -family development. It was appealed.
The parties then reached an agreement. They are back before you today to confirm that the
appellant does not oppose it being revoted with a maximum of two units. The attorneys are
Kenneth Young and either Natalie
Clyesterny or Alan Nockamson, who was with her
firm. Okay. Are the attorneys present?
Yes, I have them both, and they've been unmuted. Y 'all may
unmute yourself. Good morning,
Madam Vice Chair, Alan Nockamson, Nockamson, PC.
Good morning. Good morning, Ms. Senator. Kenneth Young, on behalf
for ronald dunlop the neighbor at 1317 south 15th street i'm sorry 1315 south 15th street
okay one at a time can you um guys put your name and address on the record and spell your last name
alan knockamson n as in nancy o ch u m as in mary s o n as in nancy 123 south broad street
suite 1600 philadelphia pa 19109 and alan do you swear or affirm to tell the whole truth and
nothing but the truth i do okay kenneth yes uh madam vice chairman kenneth young y -o -u -n -g
1500 walnut street suite 2000 philadelphia pennsylvania 19102 and do you swear or affirm
to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth i do okay has have you reached an agreement
yes we have and the neighbor does not object my client mr dunlap does not object uh to two units
next door uh for your considerate you yours and the board's consideration
okay we're ready to vote and mr knockamson excuse me could you confirm that you two
agree to this uh yes i do and can i know for the record that the record and transcript from the
original hearing is incorporated that's it the board can vote thank you calendar number three
six five three six thirteen seventeen south 15th street my vote is yes with the maximum of two
units yes with proviso yes with proviso yes with proviso thank you thank you madam by chairman
Okay, we'll begin the hearings at this point.
Calendar number 1104, 1325 Cotman Avenue.
The attorney, I think, is Steven DeMaio.
Okay, Chair, I don't see that hand up.
I have Alice and Steven Pollack.
for cotman avenue
that's the only hands that's up now if you could call steve pollack
mr pollack you've been unmuted please unmute yourself i have thank you uh madam vice chair
members of the board i am morning mr pollack can you put your name and address on the record please
Sure. My name is Stephen with a P -H -S -T -E -P -H -E -N -G Pollock, P -O -L -L -O -C -K, like the street in South Philadelphia, 1500 JFK Boulevard Suite, 1700 Philadelphia PA, 19102.
I am replacing Mr. DeMeo as counsel for the owners and applicants, the Cotman Investment LLC.
And I have with me today, Mr. Anthony Ambrosini, who is the principal with that owner and applicant,
and also Mr. Albert Tantella Jr., who is our architect and who also supplied all the exhibits that have been submitted.
So I will need both of them to be allowed to speak during this presentation, Madam Vice Chair.
Okay. And do you swear or affirm to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
Do you also agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
We do.
And have you emailed the exhibit packet with the required documents, proof of ownership, tax compliance, refusal referral, photos and or plans of the property five days in advance of the hearing?
And have you met with the RCO? And do you have a letter?
Yes, we have mailed everything. We've met with the RCO, Mr. Tantella and Mr. Ambrosini,
met with them. I was not involved in the matter at that point in time when they had the meeting.
As for a letter, maybe if Alice Udovic is on, maybe Alice has gotten one. We have not received
a formal letter from the Burlholm Civic Association. I think Alice had been in contact
with them. So there was a, and I was not at the meeting, but I can have Mr. Tantella speak to
that. There was actually a live meeting held during this pandemic by the Borough Home Civic
Association and a nearby church. And I understand there were only about three or four people in
attendance, despite the fact, as you'll see from our exhibit package, that about 53 letters were
mailed to near neighbors and residents and only about three people showed up and nobody identified
themselves at that meeting as being from the immediate neighborhood. Mr. Tantella if he could
just confirm that for the record for right now just want to put that on if maybe I don't know
if he's been unmuted. Excuse me before Mr. Tantella testifies can I say that we did receive a letter
forwarded by Ms. Udovich from the Bernholm Civic Association opposing the project.
Right. As I said, we hadn't gotten it ourselves yet, but we anticipated that was coming.
We, as exhibits A1 through A16, have been submitted. Our very last exhibit is a petition
of support from the near neighbors. This is right on a block face, right at Cotman and
Dungan Road up in the heart of the greater northeast just down from the northeast high school
and this is a twin property the Ambrosini's own both properties the property that's attached to
and if we could we're asking for a to convert the property of 1325 into a two -family dwelling where
it had been a one family dwelling and we have a story to tell about that but maybe we could do
is um swear in our witnesses and go with our exhibits and we can we could probably get started
madam vice chair okay um first witness if if i could if i could have uh mr uh anthony ambrosini
or tony ambrosini uh duly sworn that would be great okay we could if you could allow mr tantella
the ability to share his screen because he's, as I said, I've always depended on the kindness
of others to handle the screen instead of my great technological prowess, which is about
That's a great line, Mr. Pollack.
Mr. Tantella has been promoted to panelists.
Mr. Tantella, can you hear me?
Yes, can you hear me?
Yes, can you hear me?
Yes, I can.
Yes, I can.
Can you put your name and address on the record, please?
Can you put your name and address on the record, please?
Yes, Albert Tantella, Jr., architect, principal of Tantella Associates, 6200 Frankfurt Avenue, 19135.
You swear for him to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
Mr. Tantella, let me start with Mr. Tantella.
could you put your screen up and then go to our photographs? As I said, Madam Chair,
Vice Chair, members of the Board, we have introduced or put into the record
exhibits A1 through A16. Our exhibit A08A has 42 photographs as part of the packet. So Al,
if you're able to share your screen, that would be great.
here we go so there's the the exhibit list and then if um you want to scroll down to the photo
so we'll at least show the board yeah that would be exhibit uh 8a and b all right so so madam
al the madam chair members of vice chair members of the board the property that is in question is
on the right hand side of the twin that's 1325 the attached uh twin is 1327 uh the ambrosini's
and the applicants and the owners own both sides um now what is happening here is as you go down
you'll see the next photo two shows the posting here's the interesting thing go to the next photo
which is uh photo number three and four we are a building that's caught between two driveways
to the right on the right hand side that little gray gray building is the rectory for the uh holy
flock of christ church the holy flock of christ church uh has a permission for a two -family
dwelling for that use. As part of our petition of support, which we'll show you at A16, the Holy
Flock Church has signed their support for this application. So as you go to the left -hand side,
our twin that we're attached to, there is also a driveway that leads at 1327, because we're 1325,
and that leads to a parking area. Maybe go to the next photo for the board.
scroll down to the next one um that well this is showing you as you go up the driveway of the
church that's the driveway the church that has parking in its back our house that's up for uh
your review today has that little gray additional um addition to the building it's a two -story
brick home here's the back of the the home at photo number six which shows the shared
rear yard with our partner 1327, and it's an open area with no fencing. Is that correct, Al?
Correct. Okay, go to the next photo.
This shows, again, our gray area, the patio in the back, and also the rear yard. There's plenty
of rear yard space from Al's site plan, which is at our exhibit six. We have more than enough
rear yard area. Go ahead to the next photo.
9 and 10. Again, this gives you a juxtaposition.
The photo 9 shows the church in the upper right, the Holy Flock Church,
the two buildings, and then there's the corner property that is at
13, 17, and 19. Again, the Ambrosini's own that
also. So what we want to convey to you is that the Ambrosini's
new mrs gibbs mrs geraldine gibbs uh she's on the deed at a11 geraldine gibbs and her husband
uh her late husband bought this property at 1325 in 1982 uh i know this you know they took there
was a case of course at temple law school called status and process and they used to say the teacher
used to say depending on your status you might win so he always said widows always win now i don't
know if that's true, but Mrs. Gibbs was a widow, and her husband died in 2008. She hung in there
in the building for about another 11 years, and you can see she sold to Anthony and his brother,
John, in 2019. Why? It was a private sale. She knew them from the neighborhood. She had moved
out about a year and a half before June of 2019 because she could no longer maintain the building
the built her house became in pretty disrepair and she was a hoarder of a lot of things and so
of a lot of things. And so Tony and his brother decided that it would probably be, since she made
Tony and his
the offer, it would be good to protect their investment of their property that's attached
if they could improve that property next door and try and use it. So as you can see at the
photo below on number 10, you see the driveway that's for the church rectory. And then you see
a car a little gray a gray car that's the area where cars could have off -street parking then
just above that gray car is the driveway to the parking lot that is part of 1327
um i'm sorry yeah 1327 and 1331 so go to the next photo
and the next go up uh go up to uh 13 there you go uh go up go up to 13 photo 13
and 14. So that shows you the front yard setback. Go to the next photo.
This is some interior shots of what the building looks like right now.
Go to the next photos just to show they had to brace it up. That's the basement.
And go through. Next. That's still more interior shots. Here's a frontal view.
again as you can see on the top photo number 23 you can see the parking there's parking on the
side of um the next the adjacent twin that the that we're contiguous to uh however since that
zoned rsa3 uh if i were to say to you i could provide some off -street parking spaces i would
need to come back with a separate case because that would make that a private parking lot so
that's why we hesitate to say that. If you can go to the next photo after that, again, you'll see
we're caught between these two driveways. Go to the next pack. That's 25 and 26. Just to show you,
and we'll have a map that shows that this is a mixed bag neighborhood. Across the street
in 27, you'll see Smeggy's Pub right across the street, and we've got the auto repair shop
just above that
where the hand is right now.
Go to the next shot
below. That's across the street.
There's a doctor's office
and another doctor's office up at the corner
to the left or just
to our east. Go up. Next photo.
And there's
Holy Flock Church down at the bottom.
This is a
shot. The pillars in
29 are the rectory's
columns from the front. Go down
to the next one. We're almost there.
Again, this is the driveway up to the rectory, the driveway looking from the directory, the rectory's backyard in the Cotman.
And there's our building on the right that's in question.
Go ahead.
Next one.
Backyard you've seen.
Go ahead.
There is this parking lot that is adjacent to our twin that allows for numerous off -street spaces that currently are utilized by the person, the tenant who's in 1320.
27. Go to the next photos. This is the commercial unit at the corner. It's 13, 17, 13, 19, but up above, and we'll have an exhibit that will show that up above is three apartments. This is also owned by the Ambrosini's.
as we said this is an area that the ambrosinis are sort of like getting vent near park place and
and atlantic avenue as you come around the corner of the dungan road they they they so it's not like
these are guys that are coming in to flip a property they have a real investment uh and
they've had it for years in this neighborhood go to the next they own the two -story and the one
story they own the two -story and the one story and then they own the twin that they're attached
that is attached to the building that we're asking for they've and i'll have tony talk to
that they've owned those buildings for many years uh as i said mrs gibbs mrs gibbs when
time came gave them the opportunity through a private sale to buy the the property that's
before you so it was not something that even went out on the marketplace it was really through the
neighborhood go ahead next photos that's maggie's pub across the way uh right across the street on
the other side of if dungan road crashed in it would crash into the cnc auto repair shop i can
tell you on the a little bit to our west just in the next block face of dungan road to the west
is a caliber collision which at the way back when was called uh collision car care and councilman
o 'neill and i somehow entered into a restrictive covenant that has worked for years and years
that allowed this that property to be turned into an auto body shop so there's an auto body shop a
half block down on the same block face as where we are one last photo that's the property from
the rear up at the top on 41 that shows you where that little one -story building and two -story
up at the top on 41 that shows you where that little one -story building and two -story building
is. That's a three -family dwelling with that commercial space. And just up the road, above
this car on the right -hand side where the hand is, move your hand to just above that is where
the caliber collision is, just the next block. So I believe that's our photos. So Al, you took
some of these photos and you're familiar with the neighborhood. Does this accurately depict what
the kind of neighborhood we're in yes it does okay do you want to go to your a15 which is your
drawing area plan of multiple uses okay all right um i'll put this together and basically
if you want to just tell the board briefly our big point is it's a mixed bag area madam chair
members of the board it has multi -family dwellings it has a church it has commercial
units. It has a bar across the street, has auto repair, has auto body repair, and commercial
spaces, so that it's not a totally single -family home area. And Al, you want to just briefly say
what your code says? Sure. The Exhibit 15, which is in front of us, is an area plan of multifamily
uses, our site sketch SK -1. What you see is a plan of the entire block and the surrounding
blocks. The block we're speaking of is between Cotman Avenue, Aldine, Dungan, and Whitaker.
Superimposed onto the plan are the building footprints and also the parcel lines of
properties the exhibit in itself it's color -coded there's blue yellow and pink the blue the one
property is the subject property 1325 copman avenue the properties that are in yellow are properties
that maintain multi -family uses and they maintain multi -family uses in accordance with
our review of the zoning records or zoning archives available.
So Al, just to be clear, everything that you have on this that are in yellow on your legend,
where you say calendar number or permit number, you looked at each individual property's record
of L &I that was available on the Zoning Atlas site of the City of Philadelphia,
and this is what you've been able to document. Is that correct?
Correct. And if I could add that the graphic works in conjunction with this chart where the address is numerical and then the address is what the zoning of each lot is.
And then we have what we have L &I zoning documentation where we list where that documentation of the multifamily use is via certification or permit number, as well as the application number at that time.
And the dates are there of those application numbers.
The majority of these properties are two -family dwellings.
The standout is the corner property, which is also the Ambrosini property, which is a three -family dwelling, which is number four with a commercial unit as well.
okay al um number two is the rectory which is two family
correct correct number the the purplish color next to the two family is the church
right and then at the corner of cottman and whitaker is a freestanding uh building that i
can say board way back when and probably in the 19 late 1970s early 1980s when i was working for
uh mike stack jr the the um uh we got a variance granted to allow that building way back when to
become a standalone doctor's office um and then so and then across the street um or the next block
face of dungan is commercial uh and then the second building in we have a who has signed our petition
of support is mr andrilli who is the owner and operates a preparatory school and then where that
that's where Mr. Tantel's hand is. Now that next property, next door to that, just in the corner
that you can see right near where it says three family on your scale, that's where the famous
caliber collision pair place is. That is the auto body shop that's been there for, I'd say,
about 20 years now that I also years ago got a variance for. This just happens to be one of my
favorite neighborhoods, Burrell Home. And so that's basically what's going on. Al, is there
The condition of the building that we're attached to, that they bought at 1325, that's the subject.
Is there something to be said for being willing to protect your property from...
uh being willing to protect uh your property from if the building that you're tied into is
decaying and bad shape well the the building is a uh semi -detached uh building uh brick masonry
building and it does share uh the party wall which is a brick masonry party wall between the
two properties uh yes uh to answer your question yes steve uh uh joists which uh are on the each
level of the building bear into the barren wall um so uh dividing the two properties uh so that
is just go ahead all right so um and you're you're a registered licensed architect in the
commonwealth of pennsylvania right al correct al yes okay um al do you want to let's direct the
board to our uh zoning plan uh seven which is your conceptual floor plan uh there will be no living
space in in the basement at all is that correct correct and then can you we're going to have the
first floor will be converted into a uh about a two -bedroom uh unit with uh the kitchen up front
near cotman avenue and then uses the board can see it flows back and you have a separate stairs
and foyer entrance to go upstairs to the second unit isn't that correct correct and but you're
also creating a foyer in the in the rear isn't that correct correct so that um if you're coming
in from the back you will be able to go down to the basement and store uh items in the basement
and then in fact i'll have anthony just confirm this but there will be storage area for both
units down below isn't that correct correct okay and now the second floor is going to be a one
bedroom apartment correct and you're not you're utilizing the existing footprint not building any
additions out on the building, isn't that correct? Yes, no building additions are proposed.
Building dimensions are the same. The bulk remain exactly the same. How many square feet are each
unit, Al? The dwelling unit number one, which is on the first story floor, is 905 square feet
proposed. The second story, which is dwelling unit number two, is 680 square feet. Okay. Al,
Now, for access for the second unit, there is, on the side near the church rectory, there is a side alley.
Isn't that correct?
Correct.
Do you want to show that site plan that you have at A6?
That is Exhibit 6.
And that shows the existing property with the rear yard.
How big is the rear yard again?
looks the rear yard uh is setback is 36 feet from okay so there's a lot of space and and but
and the side alleyway is depicted uh right where you're at where your hand is so that there is
access to get to the rear for uh any for the either the for the second floor property of course
as well as the first first floor property um al is there anything else that you want to point out
about this? I would like to point out, Steve, that we're on Cotman Avenue, which is also known
as the PA Route 73. It's a very large right -of -way. It's 100 -foot right -of -way Cotman Avenue, which
has 60 feet of cartway and then 20 feet of footway or sidewalk on either side. Cotman
avenue is serviced by multiple uh public transit routes um set the routes uh 67 route 70 and
77 are serviced on cockman avenue okay all right i think that's all the questions i have
for mr tantel if i could just have mr uh tony or anthony ambrosini uh be able to
just briefly testify real quick so he confirms and affirms my testimony that would be great
if you could have your client raise their hand please
I'll have I think Mr. Ambrosini is together with Mr. Tantella so hopefully yes we can get him
yes I'm here there he is sir did they did you put your name and address on the record
No, he didn't yet.
Okay, name and address, please, and spell your last name.
Anthony Ambrosini, last name, A -M -B -R -O -S -I -N -I.
And your address?
Kottman Investments, 9989 -Global.
Kottman Investments, 9989 Global Road, Philadelphia, PA, 19115.
Thank you.
And do you swear or affirm to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
Thanks.
Thank you, Madam Vice Chair.
Mr. Ambrosini, I've done a lot of the talking, but you've heard what I've stated on the record.
Do you adopt that as your testimony here today?
Yes, I do.
And so what I said about, you're a plumber by trade, isn't that correct?
Yes, correct.
What was the, just real brief, what was the condition of 1325 when you bought it from the widow Gibbs?
It needed much repair.
She was living away from home for the past year before she confronted us that she wanted to, you know, get rid of it because she couldn't keep it up anymore.
So we did make a private sale. We have been involved in the community there for over 20 years.
And we'd like, like I said, we get along with the neighbors. They get along with us.
And we'd like to remain in the community. That's why people are not in opposition of what we want to do.
Al, if you could, could you put up the petition of support, which is at R16, Exhibit 16?
And that's a porch from the near neighbors?
Mr. Ambrosini, 1323 Cotman Avenue is the rectory.
Isn't that correct?
That's the rectory on our right -hand side or the eastern side.
That's 1323.
1317 Cotman Avenue is?
Yeah, that's the corner property.
That's the tenant in there, Maria.
who runs the uh the commercial space correct um 13 11 the 13 15 is yeah that's uh anthony's
appliances on the same side cotman avenue but he's on the other side of dungan road just two
properties in that we pointed out is that correct correct yeah 13 1331 cotman avenue is a house
that's what two doors down from the church correct correct same block face 1327 is the
representative from the church correct and uh 1335 cotman avenue is it's on the uh further down
from the church okay but still on your street block face yeah all on our side correct mr pollack
i have a question 1323 cotman avenue is the rectory yes no 1323 that's our that's uh the
building adjacent to ours it's oh i'm sorry the rectory at 1317 is the church right correct no
1317 is uh our corner there oh your corner right 13 i'm third 1327 is the church okay and 1323
isn't the rectory it can't be because there's no it isn't it isn't it isn't okay i'm getting
confused and have you met with the rco we did they did you you went to the meeting right tony
Yes, we did go to a meeting, and we thought it was held at the church, and we thought we gave our case, and they seemed like they were going to talk about it, but they didn't have any opposition to it, let's put it that way.
Excuse me, this is Sharon Saleta, Vice Chair Tenere. I just forwarded you an email from Alice Udovich with the RCO letter in opposition attached.
right right but at the meeting they didn't take a vote is that correct no no vote
and they and and okay so you didn't when you left the meeting and it was an in -person meeting you
had no idea what what was uh going to be the outcome is that correct now we had no idea no
okay okay well i do have a letter from them opposing this we we understand
um that's that's all i have for mr ambrosini members of the board in essence what we're
saying this is a mixed bag neighborhood uh with commercial and two family dwellings in the area
it's on a very busy street where a property stuck between two driveways it's good and bad news the
good news is if you're stuck between two driveways the property that we're adjacent to and our twin
has off -street parking spaces. The church also has off -street parking spaces when it's needed.
There is space to park in front along Cotman Avenue. As Mr. Tantella pointed out, there are
at least three SEPTA bus routes that service this. And as you've heard, structurally, this place was
from Mr. Ambrosini and from Mr. Tantella was in bad shape. Mrs. Gibbs had, I guess, deferred
maintenance and had moved out and left the place unattended for about a year
and saw the Ambrosini's as a proper steward to preserve this property and use it in terms of
and saw the Ambrosini's as a proper steward.
we believe that having that that this is the least minimum variance that will afford relief
to be able to use the property as a two -family dwelling. There's ample rear yard space as you
see about 36 feet and with that we feel that it will not be detrimental to the health safety and
welfare of the neighborhood and we would move for all our exhibits to be accepted into the record
and we would rest does the board have any questions no no no okay do you think would
be helpful to go back and have another meeting i i wasn't there i mean i would have i would i don't
know if Alice is on I would defer to I would I would defer to Alice because she uh has a pulse
of uh every community that's in Councilman O 'Neill's district so right yes I am name and
address please good morning Madam Vice Chair Alice Udovich from Councilman Brian O 'Neill's office
and do you swear for him to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth I do do you think it
would be helpful to have another meeting i'm not i'm not sure i just want to put on the record that
burholm civic has a general policy of non -support of conversions to multifamily and therefore the
councilman supports them in their opposition okay as i said this is you know every every case is
different, every case is unique. If these were speculators who were just coming in to
try and turn something into a two -family dwelling and flip it, I would say no. I made a reference
to monopoly in the sense, but the Ambrosini's have shown that they have a deep investment
in this little part of Cotman and Dungan neighborhood in the Burlholm community. And
tough 10 pounds of sugar in a five pound bag, but it's with care and consideration of what's going
on in the neighborhood. So you have to think about all those considerations. And as I said,
I wish if I could, I would say, you know, we control the parking area next door, but I can't
in the sense that I've had it where this board has granted me with a proviso to provide parking
on the next door lot. And Ellen and I have said, well, the next door lot's zone residential,
so you need to go get another variance for that lot so that's our you know our our dilemma
in terms of trying to help out a little bit at this situation
okay board has no questions no i do i do uh vice chair uh jim snell here um
is this something we could always talk about at our next uh executive session
probably
okay just an idea sharon um yes you can hold it for discussion close the record
and um vote it following the next executive session we should get the planning commission
input now planning commission good morning vice chair tanari ian hegarty with the philadelphia
city planning commission staff do you swear for him to tell the whole truth and nothing about the
truth i do um so this property is indicated for residential single -family use as has been noted
but we believe the proposed two -family use is generally appropriate for the location
and we do not object to the granting of the variance
okay um does the board still see a need to discuss this at an executive session no
jim confessor
uh i'm okay i guess i'm okay if you are vice chair
okay the record is now open calendar number 1104 1325 Cotman Avenue my vote is yes
my vote is yes my vote is yes my vote is yes
thank you members of the board Madam Vice Chair that completes my day
and hopefully you'll get done before 12 noon
thank you thank you very much thank you alice bye -bye calendar number zero
Thank you, Allison. Bye -bye.
Calendar number 0734 -1542, North 59th Street.
The appellant in this case is the property owner, Valerie McRae, who is appearing pro se, and the RCO supports the application.
Ms. McRae, you may unmute yourself. You're free to speak.
Yes, good morning, Vice Chair, and everyone else.
Good morning. Can you put your name and address on the record, please?
Valerie McCray, 1542, Royal 59th Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, 19151.
And do you swear or affirm to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
Have you emailed your exhibit packet with the proof of ownership, tax compliance, refusal, referral, photos and plans of the property,
five days in advance of this hearing, and have you met with the RCO, and do you have a letter?
Yes, I do. Okay, you may proceed.
Yes, well, I was, sorry, I applied for a license for an electrical permit, and that's when
it was poor that my house was zoned wrong.
Ma 'am, you are muted.
Is Valerie still here? I mean, I'm sorry. Okay. So it's basically a zoning issue. That's
in City Hall. This is zoned incorrectly. So I'm just trying to get it zoned right.
So you're requesting a two family dwelling in an existing structure. What is that structure
now it's a two -family dwelling it's it was built as a duplex so it's a duplex now it's two -family
dwelling already but when was when was the property built in 1920 i believe 1920 yes
okay and you met with the rco yes i have yes ma 'am
and i know they're supporting you is there anyone here on this case
i see no hands vice chair
okay does the ward have any questions no no no
Planning Commission.
Morning again, Vice Chair. This property, Ian Hegarty with the Philadelphia City Planning
Commission. So this property is actually recommended for residential multifamily use
in the comprehensive plan. And in addition, the proposed use is consistent with documented
previous uses at this property. And so we have no objection to the granting of the variance.
Thank you. Calendar number 0734, 1542 North 59th Street. My vote is yes.
My vote is yes.
My vote is yes.
My vote is yes.
Calendar number 2040, 2007 Addison Street.
VICE CHAIR, I HAVE NO RECORD OF HAVING RECEIVED EXHIBITS FOR THIS CASE.
I ALSO COULDN'T FIND ANY RECORD OF A PREVIOUS LISTING.
THERE ARE NO HANDS, VICE CHAIR.
Okay, calendar number 2040 -2007 Addison Street. There are also no exhibits with this. This
case is dismissed. Dismissed. Dismissed.
Calendar number, I'm getting there, 1179 -610 -East Mount Pleasant Avenue.
Calendar number, I'm getting there.
This is Sharon.
The attorney is Darlene Threat and we have an RCO letter in support.
Ms. Three, please unmute yourself.
Darlene, are you there?
Good morning, Commissioner. Darlene Threat on behalf of Germantown Christian Assembly.
Okay, can you put your name and address on the record, please? Spell your last name.
Darlene Threat, I have a new address, Commissioner. 45 East City Avenue,
Ella Kenwood PA 19004. And do you swear or affirm to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do. Have you emailed the exhibit packet with required documents, including proof of
ownership, tax compliance, refusal referral, photos and plans of the property five days in
advance of this hearing? And have you met with the RCO? And do you have a letter? Commissioner,
I've sent all of those those documents to the board. It may not have been quite five days in
advance and i have met with the community and i do have a lot of support okay who is the rco
your rco is east mount airy neighbors okay miss saletta do you have any of the exhibits
i do i have all of the exhibits chair
okay um mr you may proceed oh good afternoon uh commissioners uh darlene three on behalf of
east mount airy neighbors i do believe that i have a mr calton henry the uh treasurer of the
church uh present today uh would you like to uh swear mr henry in yes name and address please
Sir, can you hear me?
Mr. Henry, please raise your hand so I can unmute you.
Mr. Henry, you've been unmuted. You're free to speak. You have to unmute yourself.
Can you hear me now?
Yes. Can you put your name and address on the record, please?
My name is Carlton Henry.
And your address?
At home, 1021 Arboretum Road in Wincote, Pennsylvania.
Okay, and do you swear or affirm to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Commissioner, we apply to the license and inspections basically to have an awning put
on to the back of the church. Can you see my exhibit package?
No, we can't.
How about now?
Hello?
Yes. Can you see the package?
now we can at the beginning of it. Thank you very much. Commissioner, I've submitted a package today
which contains a refusal, an appeal, a project information form, a tax clearance, property
information, zoning history, plans, pictures, certificate of mailing, and a community letter.
Basically, Commissioner, this church has been in existence in this neighborhood since 1974.
74. I'm going to go through the exhibits slowly. This is the refusal. Basically, we would like to
add an awning to the back of the church. We were refused because our awning is greater than the
assigned dimensions allowed on a property. Commissioners, we have also the application
for appeal here on the light I apologize we have the
on the light I apologize we have the project information form here
we have the certificate of tax clearance for the zoning board here
we have the property information if you look down below you'll see that this property was
purchased by the church here in 1974. The church has been operating at this location for a number
of years now. They do provide a food pantry for the neighborhood as well as a zoning place for
the community and they do represent a very diverse community. Commissioners, back in 2016 I brought
this project to the board here because we wanted to have some signage in the front of the case
in the front of the church and we applied to the zoning board of adjustment for a lighted digital
sign. Here's the actual permit. Here's the actual decision. That was the refusal.
The original application. And here is our project today. Commissioners, on the screen now is the
elevation, a photo rendering of the awning that we would like to add to the back of the church.
As you can see, it's about 20 feet by 8 .6. It does have some writing on it for identification
purposes. Basically, it just names the church, which is Germantown Christian Assembly.
Commissioners, you'll see this awning covers the double red doors here. Outside the double red
doors is a ramp. This church caters to many elderly individuals in the community. They have
a van that they park here in this parking lot. You can see the three handicapped spaces alongside
of the awning. Basically, they would like the awning for just cover. So most individuals enter
this church through the back the front entrance is hardly ever used and just for rain etc
they would like to put an awning here to provide covers for the elderly parishioners who may be
getting out of those handicapped vans you'll see on each side of the awning as well as other
patrons coming into the church this is how the awning will look once it's applied to the church
The other documents just show the dimensions of each side of the awning, as well as further down, we have how the awning will be placed and how the awning will be fastened to the church.
We go down a little further here. I'll show you a picture of the posting that we did to post this property and to notify the community that zoning hearing was upcoming.
And you did have a meeting with the RCO, which is East Mount Airy Neighbors, and they voted?
to support our project. And if you'd like me to go over to that letter of support,
I can put that letter of support up on the screen for you right here. This is a letter of support
from the East Northern Area Neighbors Association dated November 24th, 2020, which indicates that
we had a meeting on November 17th, that we, it was a Zoom meeting, that we discussed the project
in full. There were 10 members, 10 people at the meeting but only one near neighbor.
They were also kind enough to provide the actual meeting summary form and as you can see the
support for this project was unanimous. No one had any objections to the church being able to
put an awning on the back of the property uh for um nomenclature as well as a cover for uh the
community uh if you just go back we got it okay i think i think we got it uh does the board have any
questions? No. No. Mr. Henry, are you still on the line? Yes, I am. And would you adopt the
testimony that I've given the board here today? Yes, it's true. Okay, thank you very much. Planning
Commission. Morning, Chair Toneri. Ian Hegarty, Philadelphia City Planning Commission.
property is indicated for a single family use on the comprehensive plan however the proposed sign
is accessory to an existing religious assembly and won't be visible from the street and so we
have no objection to the granting of the variance. Thank you. Calendar number 1179 -610 -East
Thank you. Calendar number 1179, 610 East Mount Pleasant Avenue. My vote is yes.
My vote is yes.
My vote is yes.
My vote is yes.
Thank you very much, Commissioners. Have a great day.
Thank you. You as well.
I'm going to go back to case number seven, calendar number 0948, 3223 North 29th Street.
i have rachel pritzker you may unmute yourself good morning good morning can you put your name
and address on the record please yes rachel r -a -c -h -a -e -l pritzker p -r -i -t -z -k -e -r 1635
market street suite 1600 philadelphia pa 19103 and do you swear or affirm to tell the whole truth
and nothing about the truth? Yes. Do you also agree to waive and stip? Yes. And have you emailed
the exhibit packet with proof of ownership, tax compliance, refusal, referral, plans, and photos
of the property five days in advance of this hearing? And have you met with the RCO? And do
you have a letter? Yes. Okay, you may proceed. Okay, can I share my screen? You sure may.
Okay, this is...
okay can you see the screen yes okay this is 3223 north 29th street
this is an existing structure it is an existing two -family dwelling it is zoned rsa5 however
this property was previously converted by the prior owner that's this brian miller it was
uh purchased um recently by a new owner who um is was completing the process to get this
legalized so um our hardship here is that it's an existing two -family household living
provide you with the photos and we're just looking to legalize the use
for this new owner as you can see based on the appeal application that was filed prior to my
involvement the property was bought from the sheriff's sale as is as a duplex no construction
will be done to the project again we're just legalizing the use the tax clearance there was
a balance we had that paid off as you can see here by the new owner this is the deed transferring
the property over to the new owner which was done in december of 2020. this is the zoning map showing
the parcel, aerial photos. Have you met with the RCO? We did meet with the RCO. We sent out 89
letters and we do have letters of support from near neighbors. I spoke with Ms. Saleta who let
me know that the RCO was requesting a continuance. However, we have met with the RCO. We sent 89
letters out and then we also sent someone out door knocking and got letters of support. There's
a lot of vacancy on this block. And there's also a lot of other multifamily. So I'll provide those
photos. But basically, the RCO was requesting a continuance because they wanted to have
people. Excuse me, Rachel. This is Sharon Saleta. The RCO then, after we spoke, withdrew the request
for a continuance and instead submitted a letter in opposition. Okay. I was not privy to that,
but thank you. And who is the RCO? Swampoodle? No, that was not the coordinating RCO. Ah,
I apologize. It was Community Action Group. That's correct. They are the ones I was referring
to. We also had something from Swampoodle, but ACCA is also opposing. And they're not an affected
RCO. So it's only Community Action Group? Yeah, Swampoodle is an affected RCO, but not ACCA,
and Community Action Group was the coordinating RCO where we had the meeting.
As you can see from the mailer, we sent out actually 188, my apologies,
as you can see from the mailer we sent out actually 188 my apologies 188 letters um to
near neighbors um for this meeting that was held i think it was the 12th of january
we also door knocked and got letters of support from your neighbors um as you i'll show you the
photos so you can see uh sort of my concern with allowing a continuance was that um the property
is already built out completely as a duplex. The hardship would be that we would have to
renovate or demolish the entire interior of this structure, and we don't plan to do any alterations.
As you can see, it was rehabilitated previously and is in very good shape. So to have to
redo all of this to put a single -family home, especially on a block where there's already
single, there's already multifamily and a significant amount of vacancy. I don't know
that that's viable in this neighborhood. And this was purchased as a duplex? This was purchased as
a duplex by the prior owner and by the current owner. Yeah, as you can see, it's already built
out. It was purchased at sheriff's sale as a duplex. It just was never properly legalized.
Okay. This is Sharon Salida again. I'm sorry to keep interrupting.
um we do have a letter in opposition from the coordinating RCO which I just forwarded to the
board members by email um I will also send Ms. Pritzker a copy yeah they had only emailed me
for the record they only emailed me asking for a continuance they did not email me um mentioning
any opposition or even relaying you know the vote from the from the meeting so and I had shared with
them that one of the reasons that I was didn't want to do a continuance was because this is
already built out as a duplex completely and that in order to comply with RSA 5 we would have to
demolish this entire interior structure and we're just looking to put you know this back into legal
use as far as the city records are concerned. Ms. Pritzker would you like to move this to the end of
the list continue it then so you would have an opportunity to review submit it um i don't think
it's going to change my stance on this i appreciate that they are in opposition however again this is
an existing structure that's already built out as a duplex that was purchased as a duplex
and if the board decides that to deny the variance what you're requiring is the owner to demolish
the entire interior of this in good shape duplex that was purchased as a duplex and has a long
sitting history of a duplex on a block that's primarily vacant that can't support single
family in this neighborhood in this on this particular block and also has surrounding
properties 10 owners that are in support of it being a duplex in addition to the fact that there
are other multifamily properties on this block. So further showing that this is in character
and that this block in particular, given the amount of vacancy and the conditions, can't
really support, you know, the demolition of this interior structure for a single family
home. The owner is proposing two affordable units, around $650, if you can understand,
you know, sort of the economics of that, in addition to considering what a demo of all
this would be. And I believe we did send these letters to the board in advance of the hearing
to show that there was plenty of email to the RCO letter. Okay, thank you. So when he purchased it,
were there tenants in there? I don't believe so. I believe Len is on the call, the owner,
but I don't believe so. Or there may have been one tenant that has since left. I would have to
confirm with him. I just know that when he purchases, the prior owner had been going through
the process of getting approval and had sold it in the middle of it. So we kind of picked this up
at the RCO process in order to kind of, you know, bring it through. As you can see, this is the front
of the property. There's two doors to enter it. And again, as the board can see, it's in good
shape as a duplex, multiple kitchens. There were members at the RCO meeting who believed that just
moving a wall around was all that was needed. That's not accurate. It would be a significant
renovation of this structure. So the block is made up of single homes and duplexes. Yeah,
it's mostly two and three units. I want to see if I have the list of it. We usually try to include
the list of it. Give me one second, I'll pull up the list of, of how
Give me one second. I'll pull up the list of how the other blocks are broken down on
that block in particular. I had someone from my team doorknob because I wanted to make
sure that there was enough notice given out and that we were able to get support from
near neighbors. So I have their information and what they... Okay, I'm just going to share
the screen. So Andre Del Valle, who's a consultant from my firm, went out and did all the door
knocking on the 18th and basically reviewed that there are houses on this strip, 3213 through 19,
32 31 32 33 north um 29th street that six of the 11 houses are duplexes and there's also a
significant amount that are just shells with nobody living in them um he said he spoke with
the near neighbors um got 10 signatures and some of the concerns were trash and parking issues
i believe len who's the owner has already dealt with the trash um since he's now owned the property
and removing it and you know plans to continue to do that obviously there's nothing that
can be done to provide accessory off -street parking um for this project um but yes uh madam
chair there are about six duplexes of the 11 houses on this strip i'm not sure what condition they're
in uh or the you know but that's as far as the city records are concerned okay um is there anyone
here who would like to testify on this case i have one phone caller i'm unmuting please
unmute yourself you're free to speak
can you hear me okay yes can you put your name and address on the record please
yes i can it's adrian fernandez swamp little neighborhood parcels association rco
and we are one of the affected rcos on this address also per the city rco notification website
Okay. Do you swear to or affirm to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do. Okay. Okay. At the meeting, I'm not sure if you have a meeting summary form or not.
At the meeting, there was only one affected address after the meeting from the address list,
And all the other participants were RCO members and also the two affected RCOs, the RCO Coordinator Community Action Group and the affected RCO, Swamp Oodle RCO.
All parties were opposed to this conversion.
In Swampoodle, single -family dwellings renting is very successful, and there's no hardship to rent this property as it is an illegal multifamily dwelling.
Also, the refusal is problematic because the refusal does not list any legalization.
Therefore, when notices were sent out, the refusal is not truthful.
So therefore, the notices did not truthfully notify the neighbors that the conversion was for legalization from single -family to multifamily.
This variance is overused in our area, which is one of the largest reasons why we're against it.
This property has a certificate of occupancy for a single -family dwelling, which the owner knew that when he purchased it.
And we didn't see any evidence that it was purchased from sheriff's sales, so we're not sure about that.
The variance is overused, and also we have too many illegal multifamily conversions.
And we want these houses to stay single -family so we can attract those types of residents.
We have a huge problem even at this property with trash because the property managers for multifamily and single -family districts
and also the types of occupants that they attract, they just have no respect for properly bagging their trash and also dumping.
That would be household dumping and also construction dumping.
The photos from this property, which is all we received, we did not see any drawings.
The photos look like the property was recently rehabbed before the community meeting and before the hearing.
This property would have been much more expensive in that part of Swampoodle, which is right below East Falls.
This property would have been much more expensive in that part of Swampuro.
The property would have sold for more than approximately $47 ,000 that it did if those rehabilitations in the picture were present.
So we believe the property was recently rehabbed before the hearing and before the community meeting.
Let's see.
Both RCOs opposed. We did speak about a second meeting, but after more discussions with the other RCO members that were at the meeting, overwhelmingly, they decided they did not want to have a second meeting.
So both RCO chairs, we went along with what they want, and we all opposed this variance.
Can you also please read Tawampo's letter where we have a few additional points?
that would add to our opposition of this variance being granted.
And also, please take into account the misinformation,
especially with a refusal, was not – it had misinformation.
There was no terms on that refusal asking for legalization.
And this many times is how we get many multifamily dwellings that the community
does not want to live around. We have too many. We don't want any more. Our trash problems are
overwhelming, and we have to always say, for the record, it is of no fault of the city's
sanitation department, who does an excellent job of trash collection and swamp little.
Our problem is multifamily dwellings. We are overwhelmed with the trash and the other problems.
Madam Chair, can I address some of these? Sure, you may.
Okay, so the refusal says for the legal, the refusal says for two family in an existing structure, it's up to the L &I reviewer as to how they characterize that. I've done many cases where we're legalizing existing uses and they don't put that verbiage.
So that doesn't mean that it was misrepresented or, and if the RCO has an issue with the language
that that would be an appeal to L &I based on that.
But I know that the board has seen that on many occasions and that that's not a misrepresentation.
Plus it was very clear at the RCO meeting that we did have that we explained that this
was an existing structure.
Obviously the construction and everything was done before the community meeting, as
I had explained, the owner inherited it, the new owner inherited it this way.
So there was no construction between the time he bought it and the RCO meeting or this hearing.
It was already like that.
So that's, again, why, you know, obviously it was done before the community meeting.
Also, again, I was not privy to any additional conversations that the RCO had as opposed to besides asking for a continuance.
And again, you know, I didn't really think that that made a lot of sense for this matter.
In addition to considerations for single family homes, I don't disagree that that's something that communities want.
We're dealing with this case in particular where this has already been built out as a duplex.
There's two kitchens, bathrooms, separate doors, separate meters.
It's already been renovated, and we have a new owner just trying to legalize it to require that they demolish the entire interior to build a single family home.
would not make any economic sense for this neighborhood
or would absolutely be a hardship in this instance.
I typically don't bring cases to the board
where we're trying to legalize an existing structure
and there's a real opportunity
for a meaningful conversion back to single families.
So this is the only kind of way to go about legalizing this.
And it will, again, more importantly,
provide some more affordable housing
in this neighborhood as well.
and existing, given there's plenty of vacant structures on this block, and the community's
comments about how poorly this block has been taken care of by the owners, I can't imagine that
we would want to deter, you know, an owner who's looking to legalize their property and provide a
nice structure to be dissuaded from doing so. So is there anyone else who would like to speak
on this? I have the owner on the line as well. Okay. I could have him speak. That would be
great. Is that Brian Miller? His name is Len. Len. He should be raising his hand.
Can you hear me? Yep. Yes, we can. Name and address, please. Hi. First name is Len Tau.
That's L -E -N -N space T -A -O, last name is Lynn, L -I -N, 3223 North 29th Street in the city of Philadelphia.
32 23 uh north 29th street in the city of philadelphia uh zip code is 19129
thank you and do you swear or affirm to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth
yes i do thank you you may proceed rachel thank you len um have you heard the statements that i
made today yes could you just explain to the board the condition of the property when you purchased
it and just affirm that this was already built out as a duplex when you purchased it from the prior
owner? Yes, of course. And you haven't done. Go ahead. Sorry. So when I first purchased it last
year, I spoke with the seller. You know, I was advised that the renovation was done years ago.
it's not recent renovation. And then just to answer your initial question from the board,
the property was vacant when I purchased it. Right. And there are, can you just explain sort
of the conditions on that block as far as trash? Have you made it a point to remove the trash on
your property and will you continue to do so as you've heard that that's a concern?
Yeah, of course. So we have removed trash from the front and the back. And then there were some, you know, garbages in the garage log. We removed that as well.
so we will have a policy where you know we will have to have some of our tenants
leave the trash in the garage lot and then have one of them you know put it outside for pickup
day and you know I just want to make sure just to relay this message to the board that
you know i i heard a message about the trash um you know when i purchased it you know i i do
know is that there are trash um not on that block but some like a few blocks away there are some
trash that were on the street so you know i do know that concern and i've taken that to the heart
So I'll make sure that there's a policy in place that, you know, that's to make sure that the trash, there's no trash in the front or the back when there's no pickup day.
and just make sure that the property is well -maintained
and then that, you know, there are responsible, you know,
tenants or residents in place to take care of the problems.
And based on your time spent owning the property,
do you confirm that there's a significant amount
of other multifamily on this block
and that there's also a lot of vacancy on this block as well.
Yes, confirmed.
So we have, you know, taken care of the property since we bought it.
So we have done some cleaning.
We have removed, like I mentioned, we removed trash from the front and the back.
And, you know, we do notice that on that particular strip, there's a lot of vacant houses, some of the houses that we could see.
They have, you know, duplex units in them, you know, just by looking at from the back, they have like two meters and there's a lot of them, a lot of houses with two meters.
and uh but then again there's a lot of houses um you know with broken windows uh with uh
open roof um so that particular strip you know um there's a lot of vacancy and there's um also a lot
of uh multi -units there as well thank you and the last question is just can you confirm um you know
my testimony that there it would be a hardship uh given the current condition of the property
to have to demolish the entire interior
and to have to renovate it as a single -family home,
given what we've already discussed
about this property in the area.
Yes, confirmed.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Does the board have any questions?
Planning Commission?
Good morning again.
Vice -Chair Tanari, Ian Negerty,
Philadelphia City Planning Commission.
So this property is recommended for single -family use,
both in the current zoning
and in the recommended zoning
in the comprehensive plan, while we recognize the difficulty and cost associated with reconverting
this property to a conforming use, there's no documented legal use here as a two -family dwelling.
there's no documented legal use here as a two -family dwelling and we would argue that
the claimed hardship is self -created due to a lack of due diligence. The property presents
no unusual physical characteristics to bolster the claim of hardship and so we would recommend
that the variance not be granted. Calendar number 0948, 3223 North 29th Street, my vote is yes.
my vote is yes my vote is yes my vote is yes thank you thank you calendar number 1068 518
8 West Pike Street.
Vice Chair, this was previously listed on 1014.
We have no exhibits, but apparently the applicant did go through the RCO process because we
we have a letter received prior
to the originally scheduled hearing from Sloan Folks.
It's a letter not in opposition.
Okay, so this would be a continuance.
Is there anyone here?
I see no hands, Vice Chair.
Calendar number 1068, 518 West Pike Street.
This case will be continued.
Calendar number 1091, 702 Sagal Street.
And in this case too, I have no record of having received exhibits and it was previously
listed on October 28th.
Is there anyone here on this case?
i see no hands vice chair thank you calendar number 1091 702 single streets case is dismissed
dismissed
Dismissed.
Dismissed.
Calendar number 0296810 North 12th Street.
Mr. Jin, you may unmute yourself.
Yes, good morning.
Good morning. Name and address for the record, please.
Zin Jin, 1617 John F. Kennedy Boulevard, Suite 1838, Philadelphia, PA.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
Do you agree to waive and stiff?
Have you emailed the exhibit packet with proof of ownership, tax compliance, refusal, referral, photos, and plans of the property five days in advance of this hearing?
and have you met with the RCO and do you have a letter?
I do. I do have everything.
So we do have a letter in opposition from the RCO.
Who is the RCO?
It is the 14th Ward Democratic Executive Committee.
Okay. You may proceed.
Thank you. I'm going to share with the board the information relating to this case.
What I have before me is the cover letter, which we submitted the refusal, community letter.
We have a petition in support, and I'll discuss the opposition and the support, photos, plans, tax clearance, deed, and related application forms.
This is an application to erect a new structure on what is a vacant lot to use as a two -family dwelling.
The initial application did have a height refusal as well as rear yard and open space.
During our negotiations with the community, based on their feedback, we had actually agreed
to drop the height to 38 feet conforming, but would ask to continue to use as a two -family.
The property is actually owned jointly by two families that are close friends.
They're going into this property together to build what is essentially going to be a
duplex condo units so that one can take the upper floors and one can take the lower floor.
The reason they're doing this is because putting their money together allows them to actually build
this project, whereas individually they would not be able to do so. The community did oppose this
as a committee more so than the individual attendees with one committee member supporting
it their explanation is attached with their letter in detail and I'm sure
Their explanation is attached with their letter in detail.
And I'm sure Diane Monroe, Ms. Monroe, might be here to directly address that.
So what they're saying is that it is, they don't support it because it's in an area that
is single family homes and that multifamilies are not located here.
There were also some issues relating back to the NCP bill overlay, which I explained
that, you know, yes, there's an overlay and yes, there's a refusal, but that is why we went out
and talked to the neighbors for their support before we approached the community group for the
meeting. This property is located at 812. As you can see, 808, 816, 818. These are existing properties
in the area that actually is on that side of the street or actually in support, including some of
people on the 13th street on the back as well one thing to note about this property it is located
right here in this lot it's one of the smaller lots in the area however what is abutting it is
worth looking at because while it's in its own lot what you have on the other side of it right
next to it is a commercial pipe building further down this is a lot itself I'm going to scroll
through these further down here this is a Chinese restaurant multi -use property as well so that is
also not a single family the actual uses on this block also includes a funeral home a one or two
units that are actually multi -family and then our vacant lot however I do agree that there is an
existing single family right next door but they are so signed in support because they want the
lot developed. It's been vacant sometimes since 2008. However, across the street is a single
family development that was put in. I think this is a part of a bigger development of low -income
housing that is existing there. They have their own parking. So it's not, the impact from this
one being on this side, being a duplex, really isn't going to be that great towards the other
side of the street because this side of the street is not consistently single family.
What we have really is a structure that I'm going to go to the floor plan first so it's
easier to understand what the division is between the two.
So this is actually going to be owned by one client, one of the names on the deed.
She is actually single, so she's not looking for a lot of bedrooms.
So what they have is she has first floor basement and a part of the second floor with one bedroom.
Then you have, in addition, the second and third floor and fourth floor is actually one unit with four bedrooms because that family is a couple with two kids.
And that's really the reason this proposal is being proposed.
We understand that this is a new construction.
there's no existing hardship however we do want to point out that this is a property that has been
essentially vacant for some time because no one wants to develop it due to the nature of what it
is in between it's going to be hard to actually find someone who wants to just build a single
family house right there on that spot now the height we have adjusted the height
relative to our discussion with the community as you can see the elevation here has been lower to
38 feet from the original which I can show on the upper plan of 41 feet so we are lowering the
building to make it more conforming to the cold height the reason it cannot be even lower is
because the way the duplex is designed it would be impossible to lower it to the height of the
next door. And certainly we also have a single story commercial structure on the other side that
we don't know what's going to happen to in the future. The main reason we're asking for this
again is the buyers went into this together with the conceptual idea of a duplex here.
If it cannot be built, there's likelihood that the lot would stay vacant and they would
have to seek another location for for their project and again these are going to be owner
occupied both the owners will be here to verify that they want to actually live in the space in
fact the one owner is only about a block away currently renting space the again the community
we understand the community's position as a committee against this application however as
you can see, people on the block knows about the lot,
People on the block knows about the lot, knows that it's been vacant for some time,
knows that it's been vacant for some time.
and actually welcomes the idea of an occupied duplex at that location.
And actually, well,
808, I think one of the properties, it's 814 or 8, no, I'm sorry, 808 or 812 might be a funeral home.
That is also some sort of a commercial use as well.
It's not a single family house.
And again, we're seeing most of the immediate neighbors that are occupied, including 808 North, which is one of the ones next door, are all in support of this particular application.
Okay. Is there someone here from the RCO?
I didn't mean to cut you off.
No problem.
Diane, Mork, you may unmute yourself.
i just did can you hear me yes i can can you put your name and address on the record please
okay diane monroe 14th wood rco chair 1117 mount vernon street philadelphia pa 19123
thank you and do you swear or affirm to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth
yes I do you've submitted a letter opposing this yes and correct can you briefly tell us why
um when we opposed this project um when it was first presented to us we weren't aware of this
overlay this uh legislation um uh to protect that area uh we weren't aware of it but we did mention
to mr jen that it was just too too too big because there are nothing but um two -story homes around
there richard allen um projects or homes is across the street um from this proposed project and
There aren't any duplexes over there.
That area right now has no duplexes at all.
But where they're building at is near Meier Homes.
So is this near 12th and Poplar?
This is right below, at 12th and Brown Street, it's between Brown and Poplar, or Parish.
i think parishes before pop uh poplar right and then um avenue i'm sorry and then comes gerard
avenue exactly that that overlay protection is from gerard to to brown street from 12th street
to um go all the way over to watt street and that's a law that was created um in september
of 2019 and they came in on with this refused with their permit in February of 2020. Now
if you notice the list that he showed with the petition it's only six houses
of uh of addresses and i'm pretty sure they went to more than six houses
and um so i'm assuming that the other people did not sign the petition i i would object to that
uh speculation this is what i'd like to know would it benefit um everybody to go back and
have another meeting um okay a meeting a second meeting it will be we won't object object to a
second meeting um but the issue is um the participation um i don't know he didn't show a
uh a a postal receipt um he didn't present it at our meeting it's rather hard you do have long -term
um residents over there in in near my homes and if they know about it also if you notice
also if you notice he did not show the poster i came past there yesterday that orange poster
was not in view um on that property and i noticed i've been on this line for a long time
I want to point out the poster is not orange because it was printed by the applicant.
We were emailed the poster and it was printed.
uh we were emailed the poster and it was printed i i'm showing the photograph with the board and
I'm showing the photograph.
the uh on the fence with the posters to the board at the moment i do see that
does the board have any questions here no no
so okay diane briefly can you summarize
there's there's five opposed to it in the rco and pages okay people are supporting our seminar
my summation is that to protect this community based on the legislation that was approved
by the city of philadelphia that this property should not be um zoned as a a duplex but there
we will welcome a single family they are friends these two people they could live together in
harmony and and arrange it however they wish to arrange it but otherwise in that the properties
in this neighborhood is in demand, that lot will sell to someone who wished to do a single
family. So therefore, there's no hardship on the proposed client. Thank you very much.
Thank you. Planning Commission.
Good morning. Vice Chair Tanari, Ian Hegarty, City Planning Commission. The property is
indicated for a single family use on the comprehensive plan, but we believe the shallow
an irregular lot presents unique physical characteristics and the proposed use is unlikely
to have negative effects on the neighborhood so we have no objection to the granting of the variance.
Calendar number 0296810 North 12th Street my vote is yes. My vote is yes. My vote is yes.
My vote is yes. Thank you. Thank you. That concludes the 930 meeting. Excuse me Vice
here we have mary jones with her hand up okay that does not conclude it i'm sorry that's okay
um mary um hi mary can you put your name and address on the record
yes um mary jones um council president daryl clark's office city hall room 494 and do you
where we're from to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth? I do. There was no call
for testimony on this last case but I wanted to go on record that we support the RCO's position
and we oppose the granting of the variance due to the lack of hardship and the fact that this
was indeed included in the overlay that was passed this past year and excuse me not this past year
in September 2019. Thank you. Thank you. There's not going to be a re -vote unless the board
wants to re -vote this. I'm okay. Thanks, Darren. I'm okay. Okay, 9 .30 meeting is concluded.
see everybody at two can everybody hear me yes okay good afternoon my name is carol tenary i'm
the vice chair of the zoning board of adjustment today i will be your chair i'll be participating
in today's hearing along with board secretary confessor plaza and board members thomas holliman
and james snell and also the board attorney sharon suletta for those of you who haven't
yet participated in one of our virtual hearings, I'll go through some of the basics of what you
can expect. First, we will be administering oaths to individual participants prior to their
testimony. Second, we'd like to advise everyone that this proceeding is being recorded and that
by participating, you acknowledge your agreement to be recorded. Third, for anyone participating
by phone, if you wish to testify, you must raise your hand by hitting star nine, then star six to
unmute yourself. And I'll repeat that. For anyone participating by phone, if you wish to testify,
you must raise your hand by hitting star nine, then star six to unmute yourself.
Finally, to enter an appearance statement, call Google 267 -270 -5548 and leave your email address and the address of the property at issue.
The number again is 267 -270 -5548.
And fourth, the question and answer box is not for testimony.
And fourth, the question and answer box is not for testimony.
Any comments are to be directed to Fatina?
Is that correct?
Yes, Chair.
Thank you.
Continuances today.
Sharon, is that correct?
Is that where I'm going?
I'm late and I'm a little...
Yes, you can read the continuances.
Okay, so the continuances for today are calendar number 1849 -1719 Spring Garden Street, calendar number 1092 -1931 South Broad Street is being withdrawn, calendar number 1753 -2533.
altar street is continued calendar number 2710 2840 home avenue and calendar number 2706
3800 powellton avenue is continued with the attorney is the moving party does anyone disagree
or object to any of these continuances that i've called out if so please raise your hand
i see no hands chair thank you
is anyone requesting a continuance or withdrawal please raise your hand
i have charles richardson you may unmute yourself mr richardson
good afternoon madam chair on board charles richardson from the office of councilwoman
cindy bathroom 312 city thank you okay do you swear a firm to tell the whole truth and nothing
about the truth i do uh today asking continuance for uh 02672 which is 566 west clampier street
looking for this is Sharon Florida I also have no record of having received exhibits
and this was not listed before no it hasn't uh they're they plan to have a well the
coordinating RCO has let us know that that the uh RCO meeting is set for the 28th of this month so
any uh date beyond that would be great okay is there anyone else here
on this case. Calendar number 2672 -566 West Clapier Street is being continued. Thank you.
Thank you. Chair, I have Aaron White. He's been unmuted. Please unmute yourself Mr. White.
Hello, can you hear me?
Yes, can you put your name and address on the record, please?
My name is Aaron White, and the address of the property...
Can you put your address, your own address?
My own address is 240 West Rittenhouse Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
19144.
Do you swear and affirm to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Okay, and what case are you referring to, please?
The 566 West Clay Pier that you were just mentioning.
I was trying to raise my hand, I wasn't sure how to talk, because you were asking if there was anyone else that was present for it.
Okay, and what is your, we have continued it, but...
That's perfect. I was just trying to weigh in because you asked if anyone else was present.
Okay, so you're in agreement with the continuance?
Yes, I am.
Thank you so much.
All right, thank you.
Next, we'll do to the attorney. I don't have a calendar number for the one I'm doing next. I do have an address, 1407 -09 Grange Street.
Grange Street but I don't have a calendar number. Rachel Prisker you may
unmute yourself you're free to speak. Thank you. Rachel R -A -C -H -A -E -L Prisker
P -R -I -T -Z -K -E -R 1635 Market Street Suite 1600 Philadelphia PA 19103 and you
sorry i left that off okay thank you rachel do you swear or affirm to tell the whole truth and
nothing but the truth yes okay this is a resumption hearing yes okay you may proceed
okay this is a resumption hearing in order to address some of the concerns brought by the chair
Claire and Mr. Holloman as to some additional renderings and information and a more detailed
site plan to address some of the concerns.
So if I could share my screen in order to, we have that additional material that was
sent to the board.
That would be fine.
okay so as the board may remember from before we're talking about uh 1407 -09 uh west grange
street which is this intermediate cmx2 lot um on grange and north 15th street um we were asked
by the board to provide some more details as to um i'm just going to download these plans so
they're easier to see um some additional um plans renderings and views so that the board could
confirm um some of the parking concerns and given it uh butts this resident these residential
properties so just so that um mr halliman has um an option an opportunity to to view this this is
the additional site plan with more information. He had specifically wanted to see how the property
lies with the adjacent building. So we were able to provide that here on this site plan. So I don't
know if Mr. Holloman has any additional questions specific to the site plan or if you want me to
just go through with the rest of the materials. I just know that this was important. Mr. Holloman,
do you have any questions? Yes, Ms. Vice Chairman. Let me ask, do you have, is the architect
available? Yes, Ray Rolla should be available. Can I direct my questions to the architect?
Sure. Ray, could you raise your hand? Mr. Rolla, you've been unmuted. You're free to speak.
please unmute yourself yes i'm here mr rolla can you put your name and address on the record and
then i'll swear you in yes raymond rolla r -o -l -a 1518 walnut street philadelphia pa 19102 thank
you and do you swear and affirm to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth yes i do thank
you mr holliman you may proceed uh yes thank you uh counselor can you go to the
zoning site plan the zoning site plan i think it's page it's page 22 i think
sorry just taking a minute to load
in this packet
I believe so.
This is Z1 through 5.
Okay, then go to the pictures, the area of photos.
Yep. I think that was up here.
This one, sir?
No, you have another one.
the photo section photo section in the packet i provided the board or in in the updated plans
you just passed your zoning map okay you just passed your zoning map okay give me one sec
here we go
is this what you're referring to that that's it that's it can you blow it up a little bit yep
Thank you.
Thank you. I'd like to ask the architect, according to the zoning map, this property
has no street frontage. Is that correct or incorrect?
That's correct.
Okay. But you're trying to place an entrance from a street frontage because you put street
frontage on your plans on your site plan it's actually the easement frontage but it's not a
street frontage it's not on the city plan as a street correct aren't you supposed to
exit exit and interest people from a street frontage
you keep talking about people entering the building
correct and exiting the building correct
i i don't know that there's a zoning requirement for that
so you can exit people from a driveway alley anywhere
as i understand it's a driveway slash passageway easement but the passageway
was for the existing building which for the use of the existing building it's not for a new use
it's for the property owners as i understand it maybe rachel could correct me it's an easement
that is available to all the property owners uh that have bought that easement typically it runs
with the land that's not dependent on the use specifically okay that easement is for the
driveway, correct? The driveway slash passageway. No, I don't know why you keep saying slash
passageway. Of course, people use it for a driveway. When they get out the car, it turns
into a passageway. But I'm referring to using the driveway for motorists. No, this driveway
that abuts the residential is just for pedestrian access. There is another easement on the Green
Street side for vehicle access where you saw in our plans the garage doors. So there's going to
be no vehicular access on the west side, which is where the concern was that abuts the adjacent
homes. That easement is just for pedestrian access. The other easement is for the garage
where we have on the Green Street side of the property. And as you can see here,
where there'll be vehicular access. Well, let me ask you this. How do the people
in the residential area get to their garages in the rear of their property?
They drive down this private driveway with their cars. So it is a motorist passageway also.
Well, that's how they're using it. I haven't pulled every single one of their deeds to
see but i know as far as our deed is concerned it's it's not for vehicular access and that's
why we don't have our we don't have an exit and an entrance from for vehicles um on our plans
it's i think i think you may be reading the easement incorrectly the existing building
has a fire escape a fire tower correct yes yeah and that's an exit for people for the fire tower
for using that building.
That is not for people to come back and forth
as an entrance to a building.
There's an existing fire tower
that does have an exit door
into the driveway passageway.
But it's a passageway for an exit
for the existing building.
It is not to be a new entranceway to a building.
It's not entering through the stairway.
We're entering through a doorway
that's adjacent to the stairway.
that's a new doorway that you created correct well there is a door there we expanded it
well whatever it's still an exit for a fire use the exit from the stairwell with a new
entrance into the apartment lobby well i don't believe you could put a a street entrance in the
driveway for 24 hours, 24 -7
usage. When other people adjacent to that
driveway can use the entire driveway 15 feet
to get their car into, where's the safety of the people coming here
24 -7?
Sorry, I don't understand the question. You don't understand the question.
Okay. That driveway is used by the
neighbors to get their car to their garage and they have 15 feet of easement you only own 50
50 % but you don't own 100 % of the driveway. So now they drive the car into the garage
percent but you don't own 100 of the driveway right
and your people going to and coming from your building get hit because there's no separation.
They have use of 100 % of the driveway. You can't take that away from them.
even though you have 50 ownership so now right there sorry how do you provide safety for the
people coming and going 24 7 from your building i mean it it used to be a parking garage so
clearly there was some collaboration before and we're not even suggesting cars there was no there
was no collaboration before. That's why I'm speaking to your architect. There's no collaboration.
It was used for an exit for the fire tower. That's what it was used for. And how often
were you going to have a fire or a fire drill? One a year? It wasn't used nor intended to be used
for entry 24 -7. The owner's explained to me that the old use was
a garage for at the same side in the passage driveway where the where we're talking at issue
here behind the the residential properties it used to be you know they used to utilize that
driveway as passage so well it wasn't just for fire escape it was for cars and pedestrians as
well Rachel in the aerial view is that the one we're focusing on so I can understand what Tom's
saying. Yeah. His concern is if we're having people exit here and we have an easement for
pedestrian access, and these homes also have rights to park their car and utilize it to park
their car, how are we going to ensure 24 hours a day, seven days a week that these people are not
going to get hit by a car? And I don't have a better answer than this building was currently
was previously used as a parking garage and there's also going to be people living here and
clearly there's factories and people living here so besides trying to not have vehicular access in
and out of here and which we have it here and and lighting and the like i don't know how to
address that with a unique site that doesn't offer another opportunity for you know pedestrian we've
tried to work with this property to get a sidewalk put in i know we are going to continue to have
those conversations but we we only have what we have and we've sort of tried to provide it in a
way to we've cut down the unit count we've cut down the number of parking spaces and you know
have tried to address as many concerns with with the unique lie I mean this is a very just unique
site and I can't guarantee that we can you go counselor can you go to building entrance the
the elevation you have for the building entrance yeah Tom before she moves that the aerial view
can you put your cursor on on that building and people will be driving out of no they're going
to be driving out of here we also here's the building here but what is what's the problem
his concern is is this this easement and where do the people who live in those homes
park their cars in the back in the back in the back the same driveway they use the same same
driveway you see people here on a sidewalk there's no sidewalk there they can't put a sidewalk there
anyway and when you see people walking out of the building going in building coming out of the
building the people who's going to use their cars to drive to their garage on 15th street people
people on 15th Street, they use a driveway in back. They drive their cars. They can easily
hit these people. There's no separation of pedestrians and motorists.
I understand that. The way that we were trying to resolve some of that, and again,
you know, we're here for the variances just for the height. It was to eliminate anybody
having driving access from our building out of this shared driveway and to have the traffic go
this way I mean this other than that there's there's no other way to handle it besides
controlling sort of who's entering and exiting and whether it's vehicles or people and we have
you know there's a small bit of space here that we have to utilize. Counselor I don't agree with
you. Counselor your only solution. I'm clear on that I'm clear on that I'm just trying to
what is the tom what is your solution right the only solution is you have to get an easement
You have to get an easement on the property on Grain Street.
on the property on grain street you got
You got to get a pedestrian easement from the property that's on Grain Street.
That way you have a direct access from the street to your property.
Because your property is landlocked.
Let me ask you, though, how does that, if we have an easement over here to Grain Street
and we have an easement over here to Grain Street, what other easement do we need to
have from this building that would provide more than an easement from here to green street and
easement from here to green street i don't know what other rachel can you can you go up slide up
with this so this is further off on the screen so the problem the problem cancel is you have
you have an easement in a driveway you don't have an easement separate from the driveway
you need an easement separate from the driveway for pedestrians we have two easements on this
property is what i'm saying so it's a little shared with a driveway now tom are you looking
at the existing easement condition and the proposed easement paving that proposed easement
paving is for everybody's backing into each other everybody's driving to their garage
so we're not bringing vehicles down that that would be that would be for these residents of
bringing people down this well you can't restrict the people from using their driveway to get to
their garage i'm not saying let me finish i'm not suggesting that i'm saying on as far as our
building is concerned we are our proposed use for this easement and remember there's another one on
the other side of our property. So there's two. You can't use the other one either. Yes, we can.
We have an easement for this. We have two easements. Yes, we do. I'm trying to tell you
that. Where's the other easement, Rachel? It's right here. So that's where people would pull in
to park. Correct. And they would exit. There's no opening for anybody besides pedestrians
to exit on this side. There is an easement here for pedestrian and vehicular access. There's an
easement here only for pedestrian access. So all the cars are going to be from these homes because
to your point, no, we cannot control or not allow these folks to park here. This is an entrance for
us. This is not a vehicular entrance. It is just a pedestrian entrance. So asking us for another
easement, we do have another easement. It's highlighted right here, which is where the
cars are going to go in and out and pedestrians could walk in and out. There's no other place to
put an easement. Chancellor, that is not the easement that I'm referring to. I understand that.
The easement that I'm referring to is on the adjacent property, the frontage on Grains Street.
Grains Street has a frontage. It has a property which you do not own, but you have to somehow
get an easement from those owners so you could get directly into your building from the street.
But I'm not understanding what how we if we have an easement from our building here
for pedestrian access. Let me finish please. I'm not suggesting we own 100 % of it. I'm suggesting
think that we have an easement from Green Street for pedestrian access in and out on this side
and pedestrian and vehicular access in and out on this side. I don't know where else you'd put an
easement given they're constructing 30 some odd units here. There's no other place to go. We have
two entrances and exits. Can I speak to you, architect? Yes. Sir? Yes. Do you understand what
i'm saying yeah i understand where you're coming from that there is actually um 30 inches of space
between our building and the easement that could be solely for pedestrians so it's not like
pedestrians are going to walk in an easement anyway or in a driveway correct
but so are the cars
you're supposed to have safety you're supposed to separate motorists from
pedestrians that's a code that's required that's why they make sidewalks that's why
people don't walk in the street i understand that i think what where we're at here is that
with what we have with this building and the two easements that we have and the 30 feet that we
have this is what we have done in order to ensure you know as much safety as possible these are
current conditions that have existed here this isn't you know i know this is we're adding on
to the building but this building the prior use was a parking garage and so this has been existed
for decades as such.
There's got nothing unique about the youth.
It was existing for a garage, which is more problematic, in my opinion, having cars go
It was existing.
in and out when we're not suggesting cars are going in and out from from the side that you have
issue with. No, they had a separation because the cars that went to the garage. We don't know that.
Well, they had the options to do. I don't know what they did. You don't know what they did.
they had the option built into the plan
and now you're taking away the option
the people who are using the driveway
for the people who live on 15th street
they want to use 100 % of that driveway
to get their cars into their garage
because the garage is on the slope
so they have to back in and back out
they're going to hit somebody
because you have people coming in with the entrance 24 -7
where is the safety there's another easement on the other side of the property on grain street
for an entry and exit that is two ways to get into this building one of which is prohibited as
far as cards are concerned from our tenants so i i don't know how else to to make it more safe and
i don't know how another easement somehow is going to make that any better again i refer to the
architect. Can I speak to the architect? Yes, I'm here. Okay. Do you understand what I'm saying?
Yes. Okay. Do you have a separation between pedestrian motors in that driveway?
Yeah, we have 30 inches of separation.
Well, how big, how wide is the sidewalk has to be? And you don't, first, you don't have that
labeled on your site drawing that 30 inches that you have for free. You don't have that on your,
I looked at your drawings. You didn't have it on your drawings. And also on your drawings,
you call that driveway street frontage. And it's not street frontage.
You got the drawings mislabeled. Thank you.
where does it say street frontage if it does say street frontage it should say
easement frontage it doesn't say that i read it it says street frontage look we'll look on your
i'm going to interrupt the refusal on this is height isn't that what we're discussing
yes madam chair that is i that is madam chair if we approve the plans
we're not going to we're going to discuss this in executive session okay for the safety of the
neighbors if we're going to approve plans for the safety of the neighbors it should be not
only height it should be all safety for planning okay well we're going to rachel is there anything
else yeah i mean because my concern about having this then voted in an executive session is that
we still haven't like the alternative then is that nothing nothing gets built here or that a smaller
building with a little less height by right gets built here and that still doesn't get addressed
so i'd rather work this out in a way that everyone feels good about and we can address those concern
as best as possible in consideration with what we have here you know this any other easements
going to have the same requirements as this easement because nobody's just we're discussing
height and several people don't feel good about it and I think it would be best that we go to
executive session with it. I'm in agreement with that Madam Vice Chair. Excuse me this is Sharon
yes and then the chair would also have an opportunity to view today's video and could
participate in the vote. This would be next week the record would be closed after today's hearing
and the vote would be after next week's executive session. According to my notes the hearing today
was not only for the presentation of the additional plans,
but for members of the community
who weren't able to testify at the last hearing
to have an opportunity to testify.
Is there anyone here from the community?
Thank you, Sharon.
I see no hands, Chair.
I'm going to close excuse me I'm sorry chair um Charles Richardson hand just raised okay
Mr. Richardson good afternoon again madam chair hi I do know that uh that members of the community
were coming online I don't know if they're having issues or things along those lines but
they also sent another letter uh which uh to which I forwarded to Ms. Saleta uh which is excuse me
uh which uh to which i forwarded to miss saletta uh excuse me mr richardson i did send that letter
to the board members excellent okay and uh i just you know i just wanted to make sure that if they're
out there they have the opportunity to to to testify just to reiterate the councilwoman still
remains in opposition to the uh to to this this property property to this project and uh you know
for all of the reasons that were mentioned earlier,
also something that Mr. Holliman was touching on
was the, you know, that use of that driveway
that they share with 15th Street
where people are going in and out for 24 seven.
And also the use of what Ms. Pritzker is saying is the...
What Ms. Pritzker is saying is the driveway access
on the other side, and she's
trying to say
that they're going to be able to. I'm trying
to get Ms. Brodus on the line here.
She just called me and see
if I can put her on speaker. Sandra, are you
on? Yes, I'm here.
Can you give me a second?
Is Sandra going to speak?
She is.
Name and address, please.
they can hear you they can hear you okay name and address sondra
sondra can you hear me
hello i think they can hear you yes sondra is that you
okay i'm going to try one more time and then i'm going to close the record today
and we will discuss this in executive session giving the chair an opportunity
to discuss it with us sondra are you there madam vice chair um can i make one suggestion if sure
i know that miss brodus has been waiting to testify if she could call me on my cell phone
i would put her on speakerphone okay great can you do that can i yeah can i just log in again
i'm i'm so i'm not sure why i'm not i'm talking we can hear you now yeah it sounds like it's
solved now yeah we can hear you sondra yes you can hear me yes i can this is a good thing name
and address for the record, please. Sandra Broadus, D -R -O -A -D, as in David, U -S.
Okay, and do you swear or affirm to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do. Okay, you may proceed. Okay, good afternoon, Madam Chair, and thank you for being
patient. I am the president of the coordinating RCO who's been working with this case. I'd like
to first just address the concerns that were raised earlier about the pre -existence of what
Mr. Richardson we cannot hear you
can anyone hear her no she's familiar with the property and the
The driveway was always a driveway for the residents of the 5600 of 15th Street.
It was never shared or accessed by the garage,
and the garage hasn't been operational in many years, but it was never intended.
At some point, there was another access in the rear of the garage,
which is one of the reasons why that garage is refused.
One of the refusal items is that currently on the other easement that Rachel was referring to,
that is the only way in and the only way out of the proposed parking garage,
which is in itself not legal, but a terrible, terrible hazard in that that easement is shared with two parking garages,
an outdoor parking lot and an indoor parking garage for the property next door to be constructed.
It is also shared as a rear access to the businesses on Old York Road, and cars coming into the garage as proposed by this applicant and leaving the garage all use that same easement.
I do have someone on the line that can share a picture.
I think the board has pictures of what that easement looks like for the parking garage.
looks like for the parking garage if that is the other easement that Rachel is
If that is the other.
referring to where potential pedestrians would access the building that
absolutely is not even a remote possibility share her screen so that
everyone can see the photos that I'm referring to but I do believe that the
board does have them I madam chair I have a CL Morton I'm correct it Tina if you can share your
screen of the photos at the bottom of the letter can you put your name and address on the record
please excuse me you need to unmute yourself okay um let me share hello hello can you hear me yes i
can can you put your name and address on the record please sure cynthia morton 1634 widener place
philadelphia pa okay and do you swear or affirm to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth
Yes, I do.
You may proceed.
Okay, Sandra, which picture you want up first?
With the photos at the bottom of the RCO letter, there's just two photos that show the second easement that is going to be used for the parking lot, parking garage.
Can you pull it up so that both of the photos are visible?
You have it now.
You have it now.
That's it.
That's it.
Leave it right there.
That's the second one.
That's the easement for cars and for pedestrians.
We can't hear you.
is anyone there who's going to testify
i think miss broadest is trying to talk but we can't hear her
can she contact sharon saletta the attorney i will give her sharon's uh
telephone number, and she'll call you right away. Okay, that's great. All right, put this on hold
for one second. What are we doing? I'm going to send you Sharon Saleta's number. Call her, and
she'll put you on speaker with them. It'll be more reliable than what I'm doing here. Okay, all right.
You can try, you can try, but I'm going to also send you her telephone number. Okay.
who's operating the slides morton miss morton yes yes can you stroll up to the driveway behind the
houses can you stroll up do you have a picture of the driveway behind the houses behind the houses
she just sent me these two okay no the houses would be on the left i think
Right. I think the entranceway.
Excuse me, Vice Chair.
lady. There's a in the package there's a picture if the counselor can show her package there's a
picture of the driveway for the uh where the uh residential on the 15th so can you show that
on the 15th of that driveway happy to um excuse me this is Sharon I also have
driveway? Happy to.
Ms. Broadus on the on the line now
Ms. Broadus are you able to hear the board um I can hear the board if you don't hear me
hi Ms. Broadus we can hear you we can hear you
Okay. I heard one of the board members requesting something and I don't know what he just said.
He just asked me to show a picture of the driveway. So I have that up on the screen.
oh okay um okay um i'm i'm i'm jumping over to the refusal items on the easement but that
if we can just i i'd like to focus on one side or the other and if you prefer that we stay
on the entrance and exit um the residence it takes an entire um it takes the prop the width
of the driveway to get up and down the driveway where they're proposing the entrance for the
apartment. But more importantly, they also have the mailroom there, packages, deliveries,
vehicular traffic of residents being dropped off and picked up at their front door, anything so
much as a piece of delivery has to come through that driveway for the residents of the apartment.
So there will be vehicular traffic in that driveway that pertains to those apartments
as well as the residents of 15th Street trying to come in and out of their garage.
We stood in that driveway and there is about the length of three bodies with their arms
out across and that is all the space there actually is so it is very dangerous um the liability for
the residents as people are coming and going walking up and down that driveway 24 7 is tremendous
not to mention um the noise factor and all the other things that would be going on as people
are coming and going in the rear of residential homes that is very much an inappropriate place
for the entrance of a residential apartment building to be very imposing on the neighbors,
one of our main concerns.
And again, it was never viewed as an access point for the apartments in the past.
that was just not one of the uses um switching over to the other easement
that easement again will be used to enter the two -story parking garage but it is the only
entrance meaning that a car so much it stops um vehicles can be trapped in that parking lot
until they moved.
It was
answered by the applicants
and they were actually understanding
that the businesses
won the right of that easement
so as you see, all of the
track out there, all of the
documents are out there. Also
we see
their deliveries there
even though it was
stated by the
applicants that they thought that
all the businesses got their
You know, I think we're I think we're going to discuss this. Can I request? Excuse me?
Sandra, we're going to discuss this in executive session. Before you do that, Madam Chair, would it
be okay for us to request a continuance to see if we can speak to the neighbor to see if there's
any way we could work something out and then we can come back to you to I think that might make
the discussions a little bit easier so we can have a chance to see if we can work with them
would that be okay and then if not I'm happy to just allow the board to make a determination at
that point how does the board feel about that well you can come to a compromise that would be great
I don't see where the things that we're addressing can be compromised on.
There is no other way in and out of a parking garage.
of a parking garage if there is a a entrance to the building in the driveway that the neighbors
If there is an entrance to the building.
are absolutely berserk about i don't know unless you move it as was suggested by the board member
um to a grain street frontage as it should be um that's not something that is a compromise
no we just would like and i'm not asking for a compromise i'm asking for people to get together
and talk to see if maybe you can reach an agreement sounds good mr account vice chairman
okay so we're going to continue thank you calendar number 196 strike that we're going to continue
calendar number 1230 the address is 1407 -09 grain street excuse me yes sharon vice chair
If there is going to be another resumption hearing, it would be good to have, be able to announce the date in order that everyone who is in attendance will know when to return.
Do we have a date?
Fatina, are you able to?
and well first i'm checking now i'm checking now about how much
miss pritzker miss broadest do you have any suggestion of how much time would i think you
know i think we need some time i don't want to have a quick turnaround i think it's been clear
that there's a lot of stuff for us to need to figure out and so i i'm not i don't want to rush
this because i if i'm going to bring this in front of the board again i'd like the time to kind of
iron this out you know thoroughly so approximately 30 days somewhere 30 days or more is fine
i can't i couldn't hear
sharon 30 days would be fine um or or or longer 60 would be better
yeah i think so because again i don't want to bring this to the board and and not have
more time to iron out the concerns. So I think that would be best. Okay. So, Fatina, somewhere
in the vicinity of 60 days from today. Okay. One moment, please. Okay.
Are we getting a date?
Okay, thank you.
Madam Chair and Council, is it necessary to bring everybody back?
Should we just close the record and just get feedback via letters from all parties?
No, if we close the record, we wouldn't even be able to accept letters.
And if there's been, if it results in a change of plan, I mean, the next hearing will be
limited to presentation of any changes and feedback on that.
I think we said that the last time.
I know.
This is another hearing.
So the next hearing is going to be on the easement or on the height?
It should be on all of them.
On all of it.
Okay, I'm just waiting for the date.
We're not going to continue to hear testimony now.
Maybe limited to whether the parties were able to reach an agreement
and if they were
what the terms of that agreement are.
I'm sorry, board.
My calendar is loading.
It shouldn't be much longer.
February 3rd at 2.
What was the date?
February 3rd might be too soon.
I think we're talking about 60 days.
Do you have a date in March?
Satina?
March the 24th.
Okay, perfect.
At 2 p .m.?
At 2 p .m., yes.
Wonderful.
Thank you so much.
I appreciate it.
Sounds good.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Okay, calendar number
1963, 1127 North Hancock Street.
That should be Sean Ward.
Mr. Ward has been unmuted.
Mr. Ward has been unmuted, please unmute yourself, I've promoted you to panelists.
Please unmute yourself.
Mr. Ward?
Mr. Ward, you were muted.
Now you're good.
Mr. Ward, can you put your name and address on the record and then I'll swear you in?
yeah sean ward s -h -a -w -n -w -a -r -d address is three three one east street road trevos pa
one nine zero five three and do you swear or firm to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth
i do do you also agree to wave and stip uh there there's i believe a typo uh in the uh
refusal it indicates a complete demolition but it's a partial demolition that's the only
uh thing i couldn't stipulate to but it doesn't change the refusals so okay and have you emailed
the exhibit packet with proof of ownership tax compliance refusal referral photos and plans of
the property five days in advance of this hearing and have you met with the rco and do you have a
letter uh yes to all okay great you may proceed um can we confirm that i have the right screen
chair up is it for 1127 hancock yes it is okay i have two up i got the 330 on the screen too i
didn't want to give you the wrong one uh madam chair members of the board deck good afternoon
i am here on behalf of julian bradley who is participating today i would ask that he raise
his hand so the staff knows where to locate him if and when we need him the property is 1127
north hancock street and the calendar is mi 2020 -001963 i sent in my exhibit packet
which is screen shared at the moment a1 is the zba application a2 is the notice of refusal
again it incorrectly indicates a complete demolition when in fact the application was
for an addition which included some partial demolition of the of the dwelling so it's a
permit for the erection of an addition to an existing attached structure which is a single
family dwelling. There is a three -story rear addition over an existing first floor kitchen
shed addition and then there's a fourth floor addition over the existing third floor at the
front of the property. It will be used as a single family dwelling so we are not here for any use
variances. The refusal is for open area 30 percent is required whereas 19 percent is proposed and
existing. So in other words, beyond the rear shed addition, there is a 19 % open area. It's a nine
plus feet of rear yard. We hope to build over that and we would match the existing open area
at the ground level. So accordingly, we seek a dimensional variance today. A3 is the zoning
application. Again, it indicates an addition to an existing structure. A4 is the project information
form. A5, proof of ownership. A6, tax clearance. A7 are the site elevation and floor plans, which
we'll go through. A8 are photographs. A9 is the RCO letter of support from Northern Liberties.
A10, if submitted, would be the district council letter. I don't have a copy, but if it was
submitted obvious that that be marked as A -10. We searched for zoning history but none was found
and of course A -12 and A -13 are the zoning map and aerial photo respectively. So just moving down
the exhibits real quick. Obviously it's the application for appeal which was filled out by
the applicant. The notice of refusal again it indicated complete demolition whereas we are
seeking partial demolition of the structure to make way for the addition.
The property is owned RSA 5, so the use is permitted.
Again, the Eclipse application, it was new construction for an addition
resulting in gross floor area change, not a complete demolition.
The project information form, a copy of Fresh Fruits LLC's deed,
that is the holding company that mr bradley operates under
moving on tax clearance you can see there's a 20 dollar balance due for 2021 which
in effect aren't due yet they're not due till march with regard to the plans
again at the front of the structure we're proposing a fourth story edition and in the rear
there's currently a first floor addition that we want to build above to box out
to box out the entire building. So it's four stories front to rear.
the entire building so it's four stories front to rear
Again, the existing building is three stories at most of the front with a small one -story shed
kitchen addition at the rear. And again, there is an existing backyard that we will not encroach upon.
so again you'll see here the existing rear yard is nine feet ten and a half inches
we seek to build above that and maintain the existing rear yard the entire height of the building
here we have the demolition plan you can see there's some partial demolition of the existing
gabled roof part of the third floor and a second floor and the shed kitchen addition in order to
make way for the new addition to the structure again the gable roof the I would point out that
the existing front facade of the building will remain that will not change it'll be improved but
we're going to maintain that. And you've met with the RCO? Yes, the RCO letter is just a quick
picture of the structure itself. Again, the rear one -story shed kitchen addition that we want to
build over. This is the existing second and third floors. And then here is the RCO letter from
northern liberties indicating that they support the project i would also point out that they were
aware that it is not a complete edition but they're building on the existing footprint
and it would be four stories within 38 feet uh following that discussion uh they uh they
voted to approve the proposal are there any witnesses here to wish to testify i have julian
bradley on i asked him to raise his hand if he wants to get on just verify and adopt otherwise
we can stipulate to that and the board can move on okay hello council all right julian
sorry do you swear to affirm and or affirm to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth
after you identify yourself yes my name is julian bradley and i swear to tell the truth and nothing
but the truth okay julian you've heard you've heard my representations to the board yes i have
thank you are they true and correct are they true and correct to the best of your knowledge
information and belief yes and would you adopt them as your own testimony yes correct
thank you very much that's all i had madam chair thank you planning commission
good afternoon david effecto f -e -c -t -e -a -u with the city planning commission
hi david do you swear or firm to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth
yes ma 'am i certainly do okay proceed please thank you vice chair tenari and members of the board
the comprehensive plan recommends this property for single family residential use the proposal
is largely consistent with the comprehensive plan accordingly we do not object to granting this
variance okay just word of any questions no no calendar no calendar number one nine six three
anybody else in this matter we have one hand up chair thanks confessor okay
you may unmute yourself you're free to speak
NS Meal, you're free to speak, just unmute yourself.
I'm getting no response, Madam Chair.
Okay, so we're ready to vote.
calendar number one nine six three eleven twenty seven north hancock street my vote is yes
my vote is yes my vote is yes my vote is yes
madam chair members of the board thank you very much and that concludes my business till the 3 30
list but i will be uh i will still be present thank you calendar number zero one one seven
1327 north fourth street
alan knockamson is the attorney uh yes okay do you uh can you put your name and address on the
record uh yes uh my name is alan knockamson a -l -a -n last name knockamson and it's a nancy
o -c -h -u -m as in mary s -o -n as in nancy and do you swear or from to tell the whole truth and
nothing but the truth for this session i do okay do you wave and step uh yes i do and have you
Okay, do you wave and stip?
Yes, I do.
And have you emailed the packet with proof of ownership, tax compliance, refusal referral, photos, plans of the property five days in advance of the hearing, and have you met with the RCO, and do you have a letter?
Yes, I do, in all respects.
Okay, you may proceed.
I just need to be added, I believe, as a panelist, so I can share my screen.
You've already been promoted to panelist, sir.
Oh, there's nothing on my screen. I came and usually I would see myself and then I would have a shared screen, so I don't see anything.
How about now?
Yes, now. I'm good.
Hi, I'm going to share my screen.
and i'm here to present uh 1327 north 4th street which is owned uh by chrissy johnson uh miss
johnson has lived in a neighborhood uh for almost 15 years uh she currently lives in this house
and this is an rsa 5 property uh with you know as you'll see there's a table of contents i have
the deed to the property, certificate of tax clearance, knows the refusal, nearby multifamily
and commercial buildings of a similar ilk, an application for appeal, maps showing where
we are in the neighborhood, photographs of the property, architectural plan.
Can you make this larger?
The print is really small.
Is that better?
A little bit.
All right, I'll try to increase it a little bit more.
Can you maximize your screen?
You know what, I'm going to stop sharing and I'm going to share it a different way.
Uh, let's see.
Yeah, because that was unusually small.
All right, uh, full screen mode. Is that better?
Um, huh.
Confessor, maybe your eyes are better than mine. Can you see that or is that unusually small?
I can't see it. All right, well let's try to share it again a different way. Wait, hold on.
Let me hit stop share.
Not having computer issues in terms of sharing.
All right, let's try it one more time. Sorry about that.
All right, I'm going to make it. What about this? Is that good?
All right.
So we'll go through the exhibits one by one, as usual.
The first exhibit is just the deed to the property showing that Ms. Johnson owns the property at 1327 North 4th Street, which is a block and a half away from a commercial corridor, West Gerard Avenue.
We're in the South Kensington part of town.
After that, you'll see the certificate of tax clearance showing that Ms. Johnson is in good standing with the City of Philadelphia.
you will see a tax balance for 2021, but taxes are not due for 2021 until a few months from now.
After that, you will see the notice of refusal. And again, you'll see that we're an RSA -5 property.
We're proposing to put a two -family dwelling here and have a rear addition on the third floor.
We're not seeking any dimensional variances. The only variance we're seeking is a use variance.
You'll see that this is non -common in this part of town.
Again, we're a block and a half away from a commercial corridor,
so it's typical that you would see from a planning perspective
as much density to support that commercial corridor.
But you'll see from the highlighted portions that on North 4th Street alone, 1324,
North 4th Street is multifamily or multi -use in nature.
413 Master Street, which is around the corner because we're between Master
and West Thompson Street.
You'll see that 1328 -36 North 4th Street is multifamily.
1314 -22 North 4th Street is multifamily.
You'll see 1307 North Lawrence Street,
which we back up into, is also multifamily.
1309 -11 North Lawrence Street as well,
and 1328 North Oriana Street.
And as an add -on, this board may remember,
when I presented 1221 -25
but I presented 1221 -25 North 4th Street which was a 29 unit apartment building.
North 4th Street
which was
Now that was RM1 but we did get a variance for use and this board granted that variance as well.
After that is our application for appeal that we filed with the zoning board of adjustment
and then after that is the you know notice of refusal as well as the project information form
And then after that are maps of the property or within the vicinity.
So as you see, we're in the middle of a block.
There's a playground next to us.
There's some IRMX that's around the corner.
And we're between Oriana.
We back up into Oriana and we're between Master and West Thompson Street.
Again, a block and a half away from West Girard.
And you'll see that a little better from this map.
After that, you'll see photographs of the front of the property.
This is a three -story structure.
That's 38 feet in height.
And you'll see properties to the right of the property.
As you can see, that this is not a purely residential block from a single -family perspective.
that it has some mixed zoning on there,
which shows that it's not uncommon
to have multifamily use within the vicinity.
To the right of the block,
you'll see, again, just it's a tree -lined street.
After that, you'll see the architectural plans and drawings.
So I just want to make sure I get everything.
So you'll see that this is,
If I can just make it a little smaller for presentation purposes.
So you'll see that this is a pretty large lot for RSA 5.
It's almost 1 ,150 square feet.
The building structure is over 2 ,000.
We're trying to just add a portion of it in the rear, which you'll see from this drawing.
This is the, again, we still have remaining existing yard, which is substantial.
Our new addition is only on the third floor because it's on the first and second floor.
It's already there of 197 square feet.
So 15 by, I think, 16 -ish width.
Now I'll go through the floor plans.
so the unit number one is a bi -level on the first floor you enter in you have a bedroom a dining
room and a living room uh and then on the bottom level this is where mrs johnson will be living
is she has her master bedroom as well as a kitchenette area and then on the upper floors
The second and third floors is unit number two, open floor plan with some bedrooms up top.
And then on the third floor is also bedrooms as well.
Again, Ms. Johnson, who's been living there for some time, is looking to supplement her income so it would make it more affordable to remain in the neighborhood.
So she's planning to live in unit number one and then to rent out unit number two.
my client did meet with South Kensington Community Partners. Now if you'll see from the it is a
letter of non -support but or you will see that there's reference in the letter to neighbors
who were in support of her recognizing that she is a long -time resident. There is no vote count.
They did not take a vote for whatever reason. I don't know if that's their policy nowadays with
COVID. But they indicated that there was some push by some of the people online in terms of
the project. And ultimately, because of some of that opposition on the call, which we don't know
how many people there were, but enough that they did not support the project. So what Ms. Johnson
did was that I asked her to reach out to her neighbors, right? Because those are the people
are going to be most affected by the project. And as you can see, she received a decent amount of
support on her block. So, you know, we had, you know, people in the 1300 block of North 4th Street,
all of these, 400 block of West Thompson, which is across street, 400 block of Master Street,
which is across street, and then a few others sprinkling throughout the neighborhood. You know,
so she had almost 20 people who were in support of her project and in the project in name only.
She's not a developer. She's looking to live there and supplement her income to help her afford to remain in the neighborhood.
So that concludes my presentation. I do have Ms. Johnson on the call.
So that concludes my presentation.
I do have Ms. Johnson on the call, so if she can virtually raise her hand.
I have an Anthony that I've unmuted.
He has to unmute himself.
Yes, I'm here with Ms. Johnson. I'm the architect for the project, but she's here in my office
and she is here. She can speak. Ms. Johnson, can you put your name and address on the record please?
Yes, I'm Chrissy Johnson and the address is 1327 Northport Street for the Dr. PA 19122.
Okay, and do you swear and affirm to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Okay, Alan.
Ms. Johnson, you heard everything I stated today.
And is it true and correct?
And do you adopt it as your own testimony?
Thank you.
Does the Board have any questions?
Planning Commission?
Good afternoon.
David Fecto, City Planning Commission.
Let me pull up my recommendation.
The comprehensive plan recommends this property for single -family use.
This block has a mix of two -story row homes and several former warehouses used by social service agencies.
One additional residential unit is unlikely to have an adverse impact on the block.
Accordingly, we have no objection to granting this variance.
Thank you.
Calendar number 0117, 1327 North 4th Street.
My vote is yes.
Excuse me.
This is Sharon.
Have we asked if anyone else?
no we did not is there anyone else here to testify no madam chair there's no hands
my vote is yes my vote is yes thank you calendar number 2604 1549 south banbury street
you're still there okay do you swear or affirm to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth
Mr. Nockamson? Actually, my colleague, Clementa Amazon, will be presenting this matter. Okay.
All right. She's been unmuted. She's free to speak. Hi, Clementa. Good morning. Well,
good afternoon. Good afternoon. Can you put your name and address on the record, please?
Of course. Clemente Amazon, C -L -E -M -E -N -T -A, last name is A -M -A -Z -A -N, one, two, three,
South Broad Street. Do you swear or affirm to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
You have to unmute yourself. Oh, I'm sorry. I didn't realize I was muted. I do.
do you do and do you agree to waive it step i do and you have sent in i assume all the required
documents including proof of ownership tax compliance refusal referral photos plans
five days in advance of this hearing and you've met with the rco and have a letter
yes i have okay you can proceed thank you
okay can anyone see my screen yes perfect so again good afternoon chairwoman and members
of the board my name is clemente amazon and today i will be presenting 1549 south bainby street
and here i have a packet of materials which includes the deed certificate of tax clearance
notice of refusal, the revised proviso form, the application for appeal, the zoning map,
photographs of the property, the plans and drawings, as well as our letter of support from the RCO,
Grace Berry Community Council. So here I have the D showing that my client Mahara Maadalan owns the
property, tax certification, tax clearance, and the notice of refusal. So with this particular
property we are attached on either sides by two story structures however because of the depth of
the lot we were unable to meet the setback requirement we met with the community and
during the pre -community meeting they requested that we include a mansard roof to accommodate for
the impact with that third floor which we gladly agreed to and we were able to gain community
support which you'll see later in my presentation so we did submit revised plans which includes this
So, we did submit revised plans, which includes this mansard roof for the third floor.
mansard roof for the third floor.
Here I have the exterior, our application for appeal, for refusal, project information
form, zoning map, this is single family and we are maintaining that single family use.
We are here only because of that third floor and not having a setback, which we have revised
to include a mansile roof instead.
Another view of the property area, the Google Maps showing where we are, just to provide
a refresh area in terms of the neighborhood.
This is a view of the front of the property.
Again, it's a pretty small lot, which is why we weren't able to accommodate the third
floor setback.
Our architectural plans and drawings, as you can see, we have included mansard roof.
A floor plan for the property, again, it is going to be a single family home.
And our letter of support from Grace Ferry Community Council indicating that they do in fact support this project.
and notice that we sent out to the community indicating the time zoom information and date for
the hearing as well as meeting
the mailing that was sent out to all nearby properties our certificate of mailing as well
do you have anyone here who would like to testify i believe my
My client should be available.
Hi, this is Sophia.
I'm just calling for a round note.
I think we have someone else who's not on mute, unfortunately.
Hi, I'm just calling for a person who may with us tomorrow at 2 .30.
There's someone else.
I just muted them.
Thank you.
Thank you.
So my client, Mahara Maadalan, should be on the line as well.
If he could just unmute himself and raise his hand virtually.
there's no hands raised
what's the last name of your client
Adelan A -T -A -L -A -N
okay it's not coming up under the last name
are they calling in
um i believe that he should be i think that's uh officer of the court uh we could stipulate
that he agreed to your testimony that'd be great
okay planning commission good afternoon david fecto city planning commission chair
vice chair tenari and members of the board this comp the comprehensive plan recommends this
property for residential single family we do not oppose granting this variance
thank you i forgot to ask if the board had any questions no no calendar number 260 anyone else
in this matter i see no hands madam chair thank you calendar number 2604 1549 south
banbury street my vote is yes my vote is yes yes my vote is yes my vote is yes
thank you calendar number one oh uh madam vice chair the one thing is uh we we had revised plans
okay we'll go back um i'm sorry could i didn't have that in my notes could we vote this after
the next case so that i have an opportunity to review them and the proviso plans form
that would be fine with me
calendar number 1844 1538 frankfurt avenue
henry clinton has been promoted to panelists you may unmute yourself
thank you good afternoon madam chairman henry clinton hi mr clinton can you put your name and
address on the record please and then i'll swear you in sure henry clinton c -l -i -n -t -o -n queen
memorial building 1313 south 33rd street philadelphia pa 19146 do you swear or affirm to
tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth i do do you agree to wave and stick i do and have
And have you also emailed an exhibit packet in with proof of ownership, tax compliance, refusal referral, photos and plans of the property five days in advance of this hearing?
YOU ALSO EMAILED AN EXHIBIT PACKET IN WITH PROOF OF OWNERSHIP TAX
And have you met with the RCO? And do you have a letter?
Yes, I have.
Okay, you may proceed.
Good afternoon, Madam Chairman, members of the board.
Henry Clinton for the applicant who's on the call.
Pat Pajaja, P -A -T -H -E -J -A, as well as the architect, Kevin O 'Neill.
If I could share my screen, I'll move forward.
Is that large enough, Madam Chair?
That's fine.
That's great.
So this is my exhibit package, which lists all the exhibits.
I'm not going to go through each one here, but AA through A10.
My appearance statement, the refusal.
This is in a CMX2 zone.
It's on a major commercial corridor,
Frankfurt Avenue up in Fishtown.
And the proposal is to create one lot from two lots.
There are actually three deeded lots.
And when I show you the aerial photographs,
there's actually four frontages.
So it's really four addresses
which are going to be consolidated into one
after those dilapidated properties are demolished.
And we're going to have a commercial space
on the first floor,
hopefully a restaurant, and then a four -story structure with 12 units and 24 parking spaces.
There'll be 12 two -bedroom units. I'll address each refusal. Maximum occupied area, we're 15 %
off. The height is 38 feet. We started out at 43 feet. We're down to 42 feet after meeting
with Fishtown on several occasions and the rear yard is indicated as six feet but when I show you
the renderings you'll see that we actually have 12 feet of rear yard. We did meet with Fishtown
they are in support of the project again after we made changes and the reasons for supporting
are outlined here the contextual fit is compatible with surrounding properties we're going to have
street trees and exterior bike racks, as well as interior bike racks. We're going to have a
commercial space, a restaurant on the first floor, and because of that, we need higher ceilings
for that commercial space, as is typical on any commercial corridor, which therefore raises the
height of the building to accommodate that first floor. We've also accommodated the neighbor's
concerns to the building, which is north of ours, concerning demolition. We've increased the rear
setback which ties into my comment about the size of our rear yard and generally the appearance of
the building was well received. Just to give you some context here are the four buildings that are
currently in bad condition and they're going to be demolished. You'll see that the lot is a little
bit odd in the sense it goes back and then it articulates on an angle back to a rear alleyway.
again here's another aerial view showing you how the lot goes back a bit and then
cants over uh to the west and this area back here is not part of the property the property goes
as i'm outlining in my cursor
uh the plans have changed and there are two plans to be stamped if the board looks kindly
upon this application. So this is a view from above. This shows the roof plan and this is the
rear of the building. This is Frankfurt Avenue. So originally our building went back to about here
and because of conversations with the adjoining neighbor to the north, we pulled our building back
to make it flush with the rear of the building to the north. That results in a, and I'll blow this
up, that results in a 12 -foot yard coming from the first floor of our building. What you see here
is a cantilever that's carried up from floors two, three, and floor. And because of the cantilever,
the L &I examiner, rightly so, says that the rear yard is only six, but in actuality it's 12. And
this is really going to help the restaurant because we're going to be able to have outdoor seating
once we get a proper tenant.
This is the cutaway of the building. It will have an elevator. It will have access to the roof deck for all 12 units.
This is a rendering of the front. This will be all brick, a light -colored brick.
This is a copper panel to show some context, and they're on an angle so it's not a straight, flat display.
We have the entrance here to the apartments going upstairs, and the main entrance here to the restaurant is in the front of the building.
and the main entrance here to the restaurant is in the front of the building. We've added street
We've added street trees.
trees and we've also added exterior bicycle parking. Again, some more renderings just to
give you a context. You can see the height is really not out of line with other buildings on
the street. And Frankfurt Avenue is a wide street. Again, some more photographs. This is the
basically basement plan originally we had this underground this is this is the only thing that
will be in the basement level these areas here originally they were on this side of the building
but because of the age of the building to the north we moved all this to the south side of the
building this is a view of the first floor uh here's the rear yard again the the overhang is
on the second, third, and fourth floor, but our rear yard is actually 12 feet. The other thing
that we did is we pulled back, and you'll see it on the second, third, and fourth floor,
we pulled back some area on the side, on both sides, to give windows on the upper floor apartments
and also to pull our building away from our adjoining neighbors. If you look at the top
right, you can see that we've accommodated not only the restaurant with trash receptacles,
but we also have four areas for trash for all the residents.
The elevator is over here, and we also have a mailroom, as well as interior bike spaces.
So our bike spaces are both interior and exterior.
This is the floor plan.
Basically, every unit is two bedrooms, two baths.
It's the same floor plan that repeats on the second, third, and fourth floor.
And you can see that every unit has ample light and air.
And this is the pullback that I was talking about on the prior slide, where from floors to the floor, we now have, it appears to be an alleyway, but the commercial space is really underneath this.
The reasoning being, and the community group agreed, that we didn't want to lessen the square footage of the commercial space, so we decreased the square footage of the units as we move from the second through the fourth floor.
So this is just a roof plan indicating that you can access the roof by elevator as well as by stairs.
Just to give the board some context of mass, again, here is the building to the north on Oxford Avenue.
You can see that we're lining up with that building.
So my client, the rest of the documents are pro forma documents, the deed, our tax certification,
our application, all of which were referenced in our table of content. So I was not going to
go through those unless the board wanted me to. That's okay. Is your client there so you can ask
him to adopt your testimony? Yes, Madam Chair. Pat, can you unmute yourself?
Pat, P -A -T -H -E -J -A, or maybe it's under U -S -A.
I have him.
He can unmute himself.
Pat, can you unmute yourself?
and mr clinton can you remove your info from the screen so we can okay thanks
pat yeah he's right he is here there he is can you hear me now yeah i hear you
can you put can you put your name and address on the record and i'll swear you in
Yes, sure.
My first name is spelled P -A -T.
Last name is spelled P -A -T -H -E -J -A.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Pat, this is Henry Clinton.
You heard my testimony?
If you had the opportunity to testify, would you testify as if I did and adopt my testimony as true and correct?
Thank you.
With that, Madam Chairman, I rest and ask that all my exhibits be introduced into evidence.
Thank you.
Is there anyone else who wants to testify, including representatives of RCOs, council
representatives, council representatives, and members of the public?
I see no hands, Madam Chair.
Okay, Planning Commission.
Good afternoon, Vice Chair Tonari, members of the board.
The Comprehensive Plan recommends this property for commercial mixed -use development.
This proposal is similar to much of the new development on this section of Frankfurt Avenue.
We have no opposition to granting these variances.
Thank you.
Thank you. Did the board have any questions? No. No.
Did the board have any questions?
Calendar number 1844 -1538 Frankfurt Avenue. My vote is yes. With revised plans, Madam Chairman.
Two pages. With revised plans consisting of? Two pages. Two pages. Yes, with proviso.
yes with proviso okay we're going to go back to banbury and revote that
thank you madam chairman members of the board good afternoon
sure thank you calendar number 2604 1549 south banbury street my vote is yes with revised plans
consisting of one page yes with proviso yes with proviso yes with proviso
calendar number
2676 -2238 North 2nd Street.
Hi, Clementa. Can you put your name and address on the record?
Of course, Clementa Amazon, C -L -E -M -E -N -T -A -A -M -A -Z -A -N -123, South Broad Street, Suite 1600, Villa PA, 19109.
And do you swear or affirm to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
I still do, yes.
Thank you.
You may proceed.
Thank you.
okay can everyone see my screen clearly yes perfect so again clemente amazon and i will be
presenting 2238 north 2nd street before you have a packet of materials which include the deed
tax clearance certificate, the notice of refusal, as well as nearby variances that were granted for
similar CMX2 properties, the application for appeal, zoning map, photographs, architectural
plans and drawings, as well as a letter of support from the RCO, North Square Community Association.
So here I have the deed showing that my client owns the property. My client is B2 Properties,
one of the largest residential single family home developers in the city.
They have also been recognized by the Enquirer twice.
Here I have the transfer tax certification
showing that no taxes are owed on the property with the exception of 2021, which is only going
to be due a few months from now. And I have the notice of refusal. So for this particular project,
it is zone CMX2, so we are required to have the commercial used at the ground floor. However,
we are requesting that we have the residential swapped out for commercial. Considering the
characteristic of the block, it is primarily a residential block. In addition, we are looking
to support the commercial corridor on North Front Street. And there have been nearby vanities for
similar projects that were CMX2 and had the residential swapped out for the commercial,
specifically 2204, 2529, 2240, which is actually next door, and 2262 North 2nd Street. All of these
are triplexes and similar in size to our particular project at 2238 North 2nd Street. So it's
primarily a residential block and we are trying to maintain that characteristic and support the
commercial corridor on North Front Street. Here I have the application for appeal, the
notice of refusal, project's information form, zoning map showing that it is CMX2 property
but as I mentioned, it is primarily residential in nature on that particular block. Google
map view of the block. So here we have the front of the property, the view to the right
As you can see, several residential homes along the block.
Views to the left, again, several residential homes through the block.
Here we have the exterior.
The floor plans for this particular project, again, it's three units, so we are only looking to swap.
the floor plans for this particular project again it's three units so we are only looking
to swap out the commercial for residential and the letter of support that we received from the rco
so here i have the notice that we sent out indicating
the date and time and zoom information for the meeting as well as the zba hearing
a list of the properties that we notified
and our reciprocate of mailing so with that i'd be happy to answer any questions that the board
may have does the board have any questions no no is there anyone else who wants to testify
including representative i believe my client should be on the line um bill archer or william archer
yep i'm here clementa perfect bill did you hear everything that i stated today
yes i did and is it true and correct yes and if given the opportunity would you adopt it as
your own testimony yes i would thank you thank you is there anyone else who would like to testify
if there is please raise your hand
i see no hands madam chair planning commission good afternoon david fecto city planning commission
vice chair tenari and members of the board the comprehensive plan recommends this property for
commercial mixed use the zoning for this block dates to 1933 we believe that if the block were
rezoned, the zoning would change to residential. Accordingly, we have no objection to granting
this variance. Thank you. Does the board have any questions yet? No. No. Excuse me, Madam Chair.
We have slown folks with this hand up. Okay. You've been unmuted. Please unmute yourself.
Raising their hand so late. I'm sorry. I'm sorry, Madam Vice Chair. My hand was
raised for a while i hit the button to unraise it and had to re -raise it so that's okay your hand
was frozen uh sloan folks office slo and the fs and fire olks office of council and maria
sanchez from 508 city hall okay the applicant having met with the uh coordinating rco and
receiving a letter of support uh the councilman has no um has um has no opposition to this
request thank you thank you calendar number 2676 2238 north 2nd street my vote is yes
my vote is yes my vote is yes my vote is yes thank you have a good afternoon everyone
thank you you as well
calendar number 2992 239 south 10th street
i've just promoted david orphanetes to panelists you may unmute yourself sir
hello everybody i'm mr orphanetes can you put your name and address on the record and then
i'll swear you in certainly david orphanetes orphanetes and toner to penn center 1500 john
on F. Kennedy Boulevard, Suite 800, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, 19102.
Thank you.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
Do you agree to wave and stiff?
And have you emailed the exhibit packet with proof of ownership, tax compliance, refusal referral,
proof, photos, and or plans of the property five days in advance of this hearing?
And have you met with the RCO?
And do you have a letter?
Yes, yes, and yes.
Thank you. You may proceed.
Okay. So again, my name is David Orfanides. I am here this afternoon appearing before the board
representing Cloudline Physical Therapy, LLC. I have my clients with me, Adam Kessel and Brian
If they could possibly be identified and unmuted, they eventually will want to be sworn in and
to adopt my statements while I'm talking.
So let me share my screen, if I may.
can you see my screen no not yet
okay it's up now okay great
so uh the exhibit package that was submitted uh to the board and to the board's attorney
Sharon Soleta, five days in advance of today's hearing, includes the following exhibits.
At the first tab, we have for the occupancy of the ground floor of an existing story structure.
um the existing property and i'm going to jump to tab seven uh is 239 to 41 south 10th street
it's right below locust street right to the south of locust on the east side
the property extends from the east side of south 10th through
we're having a problem
what's that
we're having a problem hearing you
your voice is bouncing and echoing
how's that
sounds good
okay all right here's a view of the property from the east this is the east side of our property
fronting on southdale high street the upper two floors were previously permitted by right
for four residential dwelling units and that was at zoning permit number 809371
at that time that permit indicated that the ground floor was a vacant space with the use
registration required prior to occupancy here's another view of our property from the north
the property is on cmx2 the proposed use which going back to the referral the notice of referral
which was issued on october 16th indicate that the proposed use use which is a mental medical
dental health practitioner group practitioner uh use at the ground or first floor requires a
special exception by the zoning board of adjustment in cmx2 to support that at exhibit 10
i have a copy of the use table 146022 and as you can see under cmx2 which the property is pursuant
to that zoning map you can see down here at the bottom that s is indicated for group practitioners
partners in CMX2. As a special exception, the burden is fairly low on the applicant to establish
some basic criteria, and then the burden shifts to any opposition to overcome that. As you
can see from 14303E, it says we need to establish both the criteria for 14337E .1 and .2, and
And as far as point one, the applicant shall have the initial duty of presenting evidence
and the burden of proof that the proposed use meets the definition of a use permitted
by special exception, and we will get into that.
Essentially, my clients will adopt my statements.
They are presently working as physical therapists here in the Washington Square area for 10 years
and eight years respectively, and they are looking to open their own physical therapy
operation at the address.
in terms of all dimensional standards are satisfied we are not proposing an increase
to the height or area of the building so no additional dimensional issues are triggered
by this application and that the application complies with all criteria meets all the conditions
applicable for the proposed use including applicable use specific standards set forth
in 14603 there are no specific use standards applicable to the proposed use in 14603
In terms of 0 .2, 143047E .2, we need to establish a couple things, that the special exception will not cause the following specific detrimental impacts to the neighborhood beyond that, which normally might be expected from the proposed use.
and essentially this is a run -of -the -mill, I hate to say it, but it's a standard physical
therapy operation. It will be exceptional in the fact that it's run and operated by
my clients, but there's nothing unusual about it. As I've indicated here, this is not included
As I've indicated here,
this is not included with my submission.
with my submission.
The proposed hours of operations are Monday through Saturday.
The days, the hours are seven to seven,
Monday through Thursday, seven to three,
Friday and Saturday.
Initially, they will have two practitioners,
my clients, Adam and Brian, with one admin.
The plan is to increase the six full -time practitioners
with two admins within the next three to four weeks.
They'll have a cleaning company
that will come and clean once a week.
trash will be stored and i'll show you in both the floor plans and photos of the interior if you'd
like at the rear of the property there's an existing trash room that serves both the
residential units and will serve this commercial space as well commercial trash pickup can be
either from south delhi or south 10th street whichever is desired no biohazards will be
associated with this proposed use so no need for those collections deliveries will be limited to
about a box of equipment or box of supplies about once a week there is a loading zone i can show you
in the photographs that are included in my exhibit book on the opposite side of south 10th street
right opposite our property south of locust street and that provides for 30 minute loading
monday through saturday from 8 a .m to 10 p .m as i indicated my clients presently work
for physical therapy operations in the Washington Square area.
They plan for some of their clients to come over from their existing clients to come over with them.
Many of them live in the neighborhood.
They expect the lion's share of their clients to be within walking distance of the property.
And so back to the criteria, we don't believe that there will be congestion in the public streets
or transportation systems because of the proposed use.
Again, we anticipate that the lion's share of the clientele will live in the area.
The bus route 12 does run along Locust Street, the third property to the south from Locust.
So the 12 bus does run right there.
You do have parking, as you'll see in the photographs, and as you can see in the aerial photos I've already presented on the opposite side of South 10th Street.
There's also the PATCO stop right there at the corner of 10th and Locust, which I can show you in the photos.
In terms of the overcrowding of land, physically, we're not proposing any change, again, to the height or area of the building.
In terms of overcrowding it with people, I've indicated it's fairly low intensity use in terms of the number of staff that they plan to have on the facility.
Our lease area for the ground floor is about 2 ,700 square feet, as indicated in the redacted copy of the lease.
That's included at Exhibit 16 of my exhibit book.
So it's a fairly large space, and I can show you photos as well as you'd like.
So, and as you'll see in some simulations that they've produced renderings of the interior,
there's not going to be any overcrowding of the land.
Impairment as an adequate supply, impairment of, impairing an adequate supply of light
and air to adjacent properties, again, no proposed increase to the height or area of
the building, so it's not applicable.
Burdening water, sewer, school park, or other public facilities, again, I think is the way
have described this operation nothing here would so burden those facilities and impairing or
permanently injuring the use of adjacent conforming properties again there's nothing that i've
suggested that i've stated thus far that would indicate that this proposed use had would have any
more or any detrimental impact to the neighborhood beyond that which normally might be expected from
the proposed use for those of us who have gone to physical therapy operations for one reason or
another. I believe what I've described and if you have any questions, what could be answered by my
clients is in keeping with the normal physical therapy operation. Again, we will not be endangering
the public health or safety by fire or other means. We'll actually be helping the public health
and safety by providing physical therapy services. And there's no inconsistency with the comprehensive
plan for the city of Philadelphia. So with that, we believe that this proposed use meets the criteria
for the granting of a special exception under 14303 excuse me so here's a floor plan real
quickly here's south 10th street lobby here's all the workout areas examination tables examination
rooms treadmills what have you um this is the back area where you have a kitchen this there's
an entrance in the back to the residential units that's back in this area and then there's the trash
area to the rear back on delhi street interior renderings here's of the lobby when you come in
and as you can see there's nothing about the layout as proposed in either the floor plans or
that would indicate that overcrowding the land quite beautiful if i say so
would indicate the overcrowding
exterior photos south 10th street this block right below jefferson hospital
and the school just to the north of locust street and here on the top of page one of exhibit five
here's the existing building two story three story third floor set back we will be occupying the
ground floor you have all businesses at the ground floor extending down our side the east side of
south 10th street down to spruce and then swinging back around on the west side of south 10th street
here's the loading zone i mentioned that's directly across from us
full partial block on the west side large buildings locust street jefferson
And here you can see in this photo at the bottom of 19, the PACO stops.
If I go back right here where my, let me just switch that to a hand.
Right here is the bus stop for the 12.
David, have you met with the RCO?
So we do have a letter from the RCO dated December 1, 2020.
We did meet with them via Zoom on 10 -27 -20.
The 14 -303 notice that we sent out is at Exhibit 17 in advance of that meeting.
At the time of that meeting, we didn't know the date of the Zoning Board hearing,
so we just mentioned that there would be a hearing.
Then notice is what Washington Square West requires.
We sent that out in addition.
We did then, here's the list of addresses.
first class certificate mailing of that initial notice and then once we had the zoning board
hearing date locked down we did send out the subsequent mailing um to the same list of
addresses indicating what those um what today's the information regarding today's proceeding
and again here is the certificate mailing of that and again that was a letter of non -opposition
dated december 1st 2020 from washington square west civic association which was identified
by the planning commission um as the coordinating rco for this matter
we do have tax clearance at tab 13 posting of the uh photo of the notices for today's hearing
at both south 10th street and dale high street are included at exhibit 14. the deed of the subject
premises at exhibit 15 showing 239 to 41 south 10th street st llc as the owner and then a redacted
copy of our lease between my client cloudline physical therapy llc and the current deeded owner
of the subject property here's the current state of the interior space at the ground floor
and trash area to the you know chairman there you go down at the bottom here page eight at exhibit
six uh and with that i would ask my clients to um i would ask that my clients be sworn in and
i would like to have them adopt the statements that i've made to the board today
Adam Kessel you can unmute yourself
Madam Chair
would you mind swearing in my client
no I would not mind at all
do you swear if I'm to tell the whole truth
and nothing but the truth
unmute yourself
nope adam
or brian
is anybody there i'm here brian's here okay hey brian your name and address please
brian criscilla 1537 south 2nd street philadelphia pa 19147
Thank you. And do you agree? Do you swear or affirm to tell the whole truth and nothing but
the truth? I do. And Brian, you have to forgive me for butchering your name at the beginning.
I'm just like, I don't know. So yes, Brian Criscilla is one of the operators that I was
referencing along with Adam Kessel. Brian, they are my clients, both of them. Brian, you are
Cloudline Physical Therapy, LLC. You're a member of that LLC?
yes okay and you are one of the two practitioners along with adam kessel that will be
uh running and operating this facility correct correct and
running and operating this facility, correct?
Correct.
And did you hear the statements that I made to the board today?
I did.
And were they true and correct to the best of your knowledge?
They were.
And would you adopt those statements that I made to the board this afternoon as your own?
I would.
Okay, thank you.
Is there anyone else who would like to testify?
And if there is, please raise your hand.
I see no hands, Madam Chair.
Okay, does the board have any questions?
David, what was the result with the RCO meeting?
So they indicated in their letter, it says nine non -opposition, and there was no opposition
and no abstentions per their letter dated December 1st, as you can see.
they said the number of attendees was 20 to 25 plus committee and presenters
and that was washington square west planning commission good afternoon vice chair tenere
members of the board david fecto city planning commission the comprehensive plan recommends
this property for commercial mixed use we have no objection to granting this special exception
thank you calendar number 2992 239 south 10th street my vote is yes
my vote is yes my vote is yes my vote is yes
excuse me can i take a quick five minute uh bathroom break oh sure okay i'll be right back
how about it how about a 15 minute break oh okay and then we'll just continue
straight through with the 3 30s okay thank you have a good day everybody you too bye nice seeing
you sorry today i'll be the chair of the zoning board of adjustment along with the board secretary
confessor plaza and board members thomas halliman and james now we're still on the two o 'clock
uh somebody else is speaking and the board attorney sharon saletta will also be in attendance
for those of you who haven't yet participated in one of our virtual hearings i'll go through some
of the basics of what you can expect. First, we will be administering oaths to individual
participants prior to their testimony. Second, we'd like to advise everyone that this proceeding
is being recorded and that by participating, you acknowledge your agreement to be recorded.
Third, for anyone participating by phone, if you wish to testify, you must raise your hand by
hitting star nine, then star six to unmute yourself. That's star nine, then star six to
unmute yourself finally to enter an appearance statement call google 267 -270 -5548 and leave
your email address of the property at issue fourth finally to enter strike that fourth the question
and answer box is not for testifying any comments are to be directed to Latina.
I do want to go back and change something from this morning. We were going to
delay the Duval Street three cases to the 330 hearings to vote. But we are not doing that.
So case number 002588, 100 West Duvall Street, calendar number 002589, West Duvall Street,
and calendar number 31, West Duvall Street.
This is Sharon.
Those will be delayed.
The vote will be delayed until next Wednesday following the executive session in order for
the chair to participate.
Thank you.
calendar number 38720 2222 parker avenue we were also going to vote at the 330 session
this is back before us on remand from common police court and in keeping with the court's
order we're going to vote it my vote is yes
my vote is yes my vote is yes
okay and on the request for reconsiderations confessor are you there
confessor i would like to
I would like to vote the Master Street cases, and I do not have the calendar numbers.
vote the master street case
Let's see.
If you would like to go on, you can do the remaining case on the 2 o 'clock list and then vote on the reconsiderations at the beginning of the 3 .30 list.
Are there five cases for Master Street?
There are. I can read them if you'd like.
I have them now. And I will call them in. Calendar number 0313, 1710 Master Street.
Calendar number 0311, 1712 Master Street. Calendar number 0304, 1714 Master Street.
calendar number 0306 1716 Master Street calendar number 0309 1719 1718 Master Street my vote is no
on all of them my vote is no my vote is no to all no to all
thank you and now we will continue with the two o 'clock cases and are we on number 10 geiger road
sharon um yes you are getting to calendar number 2702 260 geiger road and i have to apologize
um i dropped every paper i had on the floor so i've been collecting them so i apologize for my
tortiness? The attorney on this one is Justin Crick. Okay. Good afternoon, members of the
board. Hi, Mr. Crick. Can you put your name and address on the record and spell your last name?
Yes, Justin Crick, K -R -I -K. My address is 1500 John F. Kennedy Boulevard, Suite 630,
philadelphia pa 19102 and do you swear or firm to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth
yes do you agree to wave and stip yes and have you emailed the exhibit packet with the required
documents including proof of ownership tax compliance refusal referral photos plans
five days in advance of this hearing and have you met with the rco and do you have a letter
Yes to all, except that some of the information came several days before, not quite five, but we obtained everything that was necessary, and it's been sent several days ago.
Okay, great. You may proceed.
Thank you. I'll share my screen.
Members of the board, I'm here on behalf of an applicant proposed tenant of the property at 26062 Geiger Road.
The proposed tenant is Active Life Services, and I have Marina Americanova here, and if she can raise her hand so that she can be identified later on for adopting testimony.
The property in question is listed as I2 Industrial, and the proposed use for a portion of the premises is for an adult daycare.
The refusal is that that adult daycare is not permitted in this zoning district.
I will want to note just at the beginning that the initial issue that I was having was tax clearance as the owner has entered into a tax payment agreement with the city.
I have since obtained the clearance that's attached to this presentation and has been forwarded to the board.
The refusal is very straightforward.
And again, it's just a use variance for the adult daycare.
To give you a bit of an idea of where the property is located, this is in the northeast section of Philadelphia off of Red Lion Road.
And this entire Geiger Road loop, as it loops around, is an industrial corridor.
However, it is riddled with several basically commercial businesses, both in the nature of daycares or studios for different performing arts and such things like that.
There are industrial uses within here as well, but several commercial uses have been approved.
As you can see from this little bit further back aerial view, the building is located at the edge and rear of this commercial, I'm sorry, of this industrial corridor.
From the street, this is a frontage of the building and another frontage with siding and showing the parking lot.
And another frontage with siding and showing the parking lot available to the tenant.
However, as we have discussed with the Neighborhood Association, the parking is mainly for the proposed staff, at which any time could be at most 13 to 15 people, but because they are in shifts, it would likely be less.
The adult daycare is seeking to have approximately 40 clients, but none of them are expected to drive.
they would be transported by a third -party company to the location.
The staff would consist of nurses, directors, and program aides.
And Marina, who will be testifying, who is a member of the – or an officer of the applicant,
has previously worked for the Philadelphia Agency for the Aging
and operates another adult daycare in the city.
and so this one would be fully licensed with the state and city as well.
Again, another parking and here's a little bit more of a close -up. So there are other uses in
the building and what this diagram shows is that we are seeking only to use the area outlined in
red and I'll shrink that just a bit so you can see. There are other approved uses that
we would like to remain in place we do not want to affect those at the moment and they do not
interfere with this use we did note with the neighborhood association that the doorways that
are into these other spaces would not be used by our client and they would be they would remain
locked but for egress purposes give me one moment a little bit more of a close -up of this area
that we're going to be using it is approximately 6 ,750 square feet and we find that there is a
significant need for this adult daycare service or adult care service in Philadelphia with a
rising population, and it is an alternative to nursing homes. It will be there to provide
services for people with physical disabilities and dementia as well.
They will be distributing medicine in accordance with the state regulations,
providing certain meals throughout the day, exercise, and other activities.
It is not an exclusive parking lot. However, again, we don't anticipate the use of more than
a few spaces at a time for this program I'm sorry about that let's move that back
the notice of zoning is posted and I am attaching the initial page of the
proposed lease with the act with the actual owner of the property
we have met with the greater busselton civic league they do support this application there
were a few that were opposed but um that was mainly for reasons that we have overcome with
the with the neighborhood at the time of the meeting and attached is the tax clearance
certificate along with the initial application and project information form um again pretty
straightforward application simply just for the use variance and we feel that it is the highest
and best use for this portion of this property as um as there's a lot of open space and a lot
of separate rooms to allow for offices for processing but also for breakout sort of uh
activities for these um for these residents i'm sorry for these um clients uh at the property
i if miss the greater buses and civic league i'm sorry the greater buses and civic league is in
support yes they are yes they are they're yes and that that meeting yes very good um if miss
amerikanov um if you could raise your hand so that the board can promote you to panelists
I'm not sure if anyone sees her on there I can place a thank you okay she's been promoted
to panelists she can unmute herself hello hi marina would you state and spell your name
and your address for the board.
Marina, can you hear me?
Marina, can you hear me?
Marina, you need to unmute yourself.
It's still seeing that you're muted.
it. Hello, Justin? Yes. As an officer of the court, I think we could stipulate that
she would agree to your testimony. I appreciate that. I will stipulate that she would adopt my
testimony as her own as an officer of the
court. Thank you, confessor.
Does the board have any questions?
No. No.
Planning Commission? No.
Planning Commission?
Do you
swear or affirm to tell the whole truth and
nothing but the truth? Yes, I do.
Name and address.
Ian Litwin,
Planning Commission staff.
That's I -A -N -L -I -T -W -I -N.
We good?
Yeah, we'd like to know your recommendation
for 260 Geiger -Rude.
Oh, yeah, we have no objection.
Thank you.
Calendar, is there anyone else
who would like to weigh in on this?
madam chair i have two hands up one is
thank you madam chair members of the board alice yudovich from councilman brian o 'neill's office
hi alice do you swear for him to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth
i do okay the councilman has no objection to the granting of the variance at this location
okay great thank you and the next person thank you
i think there's another person who would like to speak
yes i'm sorry i was muting myself madam chair
today's an unusual day yes it is it's a caller phone number ending in 1080
well you just have to unmute yourself hello hello yes can you put your name and address on the
record please uh my name is marina americanova it's m -a -r -i -n -a americanova it's a -m -e -r -k -h -a -m -o -v -a
and the address is 2201 Threl Street, St. RAHLE Street, Unit C1, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, 19152.
Okay, do you swear or affirm to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
Thank you, Marina, for coming on.
I did already represent to the board that you would have adopted my testimony, but since you are on and have been able to to to speak, have you heard my statements to the board today?
Yes, I did.
And would you adopt those statements as your own, as truthful as if you were to give that testimony yourself?
Thank you very much, Marina.
Thank you.
okay and um this case is ready to be voted calendar number 2702 260 geiger road my vote is yes
my vote is yes my vote is yes my vote is yes
thank you very much members of the board thank you thank you and i think that concludes the two
o 'clock hearing hearings that correct confessor um wait one minute i think we got a couple more
yes i think there are others uh confessor is correct
that may not have exhibits
are they confessor do you want to read them out because i don't have them here
I don't have them right in front of me.
I had to step away from my office real quick.
step away from my office real quick let me give me a second let me look um actually there's only
Let me, give me a second.
Let me look.
one more and no i you it had no exhibits but you continued it earlier so you are done oh okay thank
you we will move right into the 3 30 hearings
good afternoon my name is carol tenery and today i'll be the chair of the zoning board of adjustment
i'll be participating along with board secretary confessor plaza and board members thomas holliman
and james snell along with sharon saletta who is our attorney for those of you who haven't yet
participated in one of our virtual hearings i'll go through some of the basics of what you can
expect. First, we will be administering oaths to individual participants prior to their testimony.
Second, we'd like to advise everyone that this proceeding is being recorded and that by
participating, you acknowledge your agreement to be recorded. Third, for anyone participating by
phone, if you wish to testify, you must raise your hand by hitting star nine, then star six to
unmute yourself. That's raise your hand by hitting star nine, then star six to unmute yourself.
Finally, to enter an appearance statement, call Google 267 -270 -5548 and leave your email address
and the address of the property at issue. The number again is 267 -270 -5548. And fourth,
the question and answer box is not for testimony any comments are to be or to be directed to miss
fatima are there wait one second those days
Sharon is there a continuance list with this um calendar number 0118 4715 Green Street
is being continued and that's the only continuance i have are there any requests for continuances
madam chair we have sloan folks with their hand up okay
you may unmute yourself Mr. Foulkes thank you ma 'am hi Mr. Foulkes name and address for the
record please and you're sworn in good afternoon ma 'am Sloan Foulkes S -L -O -A -N -E fire O -L -K -S
office of councilman Maria Quiñones Sanchez room 508 city hall um we're requesting a continuance
for case number one, calendar number MI -2020 -000 -985 -1616 North 2nd Street, number one.
They have not met with the RCO and wish for the community to weigh in on the variance request.
Okay, thank you.
Is there anyone else who would like to voice an opinion on this, if you disagree with this?
I'm sorry, maybe I misheard the address, but I'm not seeing this on our 330 list.
It's number, oh wait, it's not number one.
Yes, it is number one, 1660 North 2nd Street.
That's right, and we have no exhibits for that either.
Right.
It's the first listing.
No hands are up.
I have one hand up, Tina Marie Russell.
You may unmute yourself, Ms. Russell.
Ms. Russell, you're still muted.
There are no more here.
Miss Russell, could you unmute?
i'm not getting a response madam chair okay so that case number one is continued
I'm not getting a response.
the next is calendar number zero eight five three two thirty one shares lean
i'm sorry did mr folks have another continuance request i thought that he said he had to
No, ma 'am. Just that one.
Okay. Thank you.
Is anyone here for 231 Schurz Lane?
Yes. I just promoted Henry Clinton.
Madam Chairman, I am Henry Clinton.
Hi, Mr. Clinton. Name and address for the record and then I'll swear you in or you've already been sworn in.
Henry Clinton, Queen Memorial Building, 1313 South 33rd Street, Philadelphia PA, 19146.
Do you agree to waive and stip?
And also, have you emailed the exhibit packet with the required documents, including proof of ownership, tax compliance, refusal referral, photos and plans of the property five days in advance of this hearing?
Have you met with the RCO and do you have a letter?
yes to all of the above thank you you may proceed
thank you may i share my screen sure you may
is that visible everyone that's great okay uh so today is
two properties, 231 and 233 Schurz Lane. It's in Maniunk, right adjacent to the Ovalcans for
Maniunk Avenue. My presentation includes a table of contents, which are the following exhibits, AA
through A10. My appearance statement and refusal. I'll touch on this first. So this is an RSA 5 zone
and our proposal is for a single family house. We're not asking for any relief with regard to
height, rear yard, open space, it's simply dimensional variances, as well as a steep slope
requirement, which prohibits, excuse me, let me backtrack, these are all use variance requests.
So the first two issues concern parking, and I'll address that with aerial photographs,
indicating that in this particular area, within 100 feet of this property, there are 14 other
garages. And we're asking for an open air space, parking space, which is similar, which is exactly
like the home next door. The steep slopes, when you see the aerial photographs, you'll see that
these two lots, and we're consolidating two lots into one, these two lots are adjacent to
the Mattyonk overpass. And I looked on historical records, and it appears to me that these lots
have been vacant for well over 50 years. If there are other people from Mattyonk on the call,
they can correct me, but that's what my research has indicated thus far. And the idea behind steep
slopes, not to talk down to the board, but it's because usually steep slopes are involved in a
wider area than what we have. Our steep slopes are only 17 feet wide. And in a wider area,
the reason that regulations usually prohibit you when building on slopes that are in excess of 25 %
is because that raises stormwater issues. It raises sedimentation, erosion issues. And
Rustin Knoller, who is on the call and is the architect of record, will touch on those issues
later as we get through the presentation. So this is the letter from the Wissahick and Neighbors
Civic Association. We met with them twice. The first time I met with them, I think the vote was
against us five to three. We went back and met again. And even though the letter says
the vote was to oppose, when you really look at the tally here, you have five from the board
opposing and five from the community opposing. That's 10. Well, if you look at the other side,
you have non -opposition is nine and support is 11. So in my mind, this is not a letter of opposition.
this is a letter of non -opposition because the tally is 11 to 10 granted there's a split between
the board and the attendees but when you do the aggregate of adding the non -opposition with
But when you do the aggregate of adding the non -opposition with the support, that comes to 11 versus 10.
So even though on paper this appears to be a letter of opposition, I believe it's a letter of non -opposition.
And the board can take basically judicial review of this document to indicate it's a vote of 11 to 10.
Okay, and we will proceed.
So here's an aerial view, and I'm going to show you quite a few.
this is the two lots. It's a consolidation of two lots that are 17 feet wide by about 90 deep.
The Schur's Lane goes underneath Manioc Avenue which is right here. So there's a front parking
space on this house. There's a garage here. One, two, three, four. All four of these have garages
and I'll show you closer photographs so you're not thinking I'm doctoring the photos. So this
these are the two lots right adjacent to the Manionk Avenue overpass and here are one two
three four five garages here the other four garages that I saw you just showed you which
you could not see from my aerial photograph are on this side of the bridge
the this is now further down Schur's Lane as you as you go down toward the river
these are four garages right before our property and our property is right here
now this is the photograph looking down toward the river traffic goes toward the river on the
right side which is the west side and traffic comes up stream as you're on this side of Shurs
Lane but here are the four garages that are on the other side of the Maniunk Avenue overpass
Again, just some more perspective photographs as you can see.
The house, and I'll show you the plans, and Rustin may work through them.
The house will be the same depth of the house next door.
And between the rear of our house and this house here, that is on Mount Yoke Avenue, is about 22 feet.
Again, just some more perspective photographs.
This is a photograph looking over the overpass, which is here, down into where our lots are, which you can partially see.
Here are the plans. We did make some changes as a result of our first meeting with the RCO.
We have some architectural embellishments on the front.
We actually changed the color of the brick and the bay on the front to make it more in line with the color of the brick on the block.
We put an anointing above the fourth floor balcony, and we also put an anointing above the front porch.
So this is a cutaway of the property.
As you can see, the grade starts here and works down towards Shurer's Lane.
And so the slope is also going from the house up to the bridge, and I'll show you that with some contour shots.
this is the parking again reflecting that there are garages here there are garages here
there are garages here there's an open air parking spot for the house next door and we
would ask for the same thing which is has a turning radius that is compatible with moving
into the space this is the contour map just to give you a brief overview your elevation here
is about 156 feet and you can see the contour lines going up under 67 171 you end up with about
an elevation only up here of 182. so the property basically slopes this way and Rustin's going to
talk about how they're going to cope with this from a construction viewpoint how the retaining
walls and the concrete walls that will be built as part of the home will buttress up against any
dirt and any earth disturbance here. The other thing that's unique about this lot,
and I'm going to argue this at the end, why this is a hardship, is even though this lot is 17 wide,
these are the abutments on the bridge that actually hold up the overpass. So this lot is
really non -buildable because of the intrusions of these abutments, and it takes up quite a few
space square footage on this particular lot. And it also ties in with our argument that the steep
slopes here, yes there are, but they can be addressed with erosion, sedimentation, and storm
water control. These are the floor plans. This is the elevation, trying to keep in line with the
house next door. This is Maniolk Avenue. This is the view from the back of the house. This is the
view looking from south to north. And this is the view of the top of the home if you happen to be
traveling along Maniolk Avenue. So Rustin, if at this point
Manuel Cavanaugh. So Rustin, if at this point, can Rustin Ohler be unmuted so I can just ask
him a few questions?
Good afternoon. Hi, Mr. Ohler, can you put your name and address on the record,
please? And then I'll swear you in. Yes, Rustin Ohler, last name O -H -L -E -R,
Office address is 1225 North 7th Street, Philadelphia, PA.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
Okay, you may proceed.
Good afternoon, Mr. Owe. How are you today? Good. So, Mr. Owe, you heard me testify concerning
the steep slopes and the reason those regulations are in play. Can you propound on that a little
bit more? What is the purpose of the steep slope regulation? I mean, so mine are saying the steep
slope is to protect the natural, you know, landscaping resources to avoid any unnecessary
soil erosion and runoff. So, I mean, basically what we'll do with this as other similar smaller
sites in Manioc Ave that we've worked on, you know, we work closely with a civil engineer,
we perform erosion control plans, we get those approved by the water department
and have those reviewed and approved by city planning, you know, as part of our building
permitting process. And then in the event, any additional engineering measures need to be made
for, you know, piping, water deviation, on -site storage tanks, we, you know, we take care of that
in the technical phase of building permitting. And Mr. Woolworth, can you, were you done your
response? I'm sorry. No, I mean, so basically what I was going to say is, you know, normally where we
see larger sites where we're protecting a lot of the steep slope, it's more of like a natural
man -made slope. I think the slope on this site, as you can see, there isn't a single part of it
under 25%, so it's completely unbuildable without receiving the steep slope variance,
and I think a lot of it is because, you know, because of the bridge and what was done in order
to, like, make the Maniunk Avenue bridge where it is, and then you can see even as the lines get
tighter where the bridge embutment is um which happened as a repair to the manioc avenue bridge
um uh i don't know a few years or a decade back um further exacerbated and increased that so
um it's not a hundred percent man -made slope on this particular parcel mr roller if uh
the the garage refusals were not here uh would this be a buy right build
uh no nothing can be built on this site with without a variance because of the steep slope
and i had this cutaway section here can you describe to the board what type of retaining
walls and foundation issues you will have in play to prevent any type of erosion or just just storm
water uh yeah i mean so there'll be concrete retaining walls there will be continuous perimeter
drains, you know, gravel stops up against those and waterproofing measures, which will
help to, you know, route and run the water and the retaining walls would help eliminate
any erosion control.
Mr. Roller, did I ask you to conduct a survey of the number of garages within about 100
feet, 200 feet, or excuse me, within a block on each direction of this particular property?
uh yes so we did a uh survey uh basically like a physical survey of the existing surface parking
spaces and garages um that are on the block basically from the street to the south to the
street to the north so basically with just literally within this block um and there are
30 um 30 surface parking or garage garages on this block thank you mr roller um
Mr. Klinger, is there anyone else who would like to testify?
Yes, my client, Dmitry Stardominski, that's D -I -M -I -T -R -Y -S -T -A -R -O -M -I -N -S -K -Y is on the line, I believe.
Hello.
Hello, Dmitry, you're going to be sworn in now.
Thank you.
do you agree to do you not agree do you swear or affirm to tell the whole truth and nothing
but the truth yes name and address please for the record dimitry starominski d -i -m -i -t -r -y
starominski s -t -a -r -o -m -i -n -s -k -y address 172 glennifer hill road
O -M -I -N -S -K -Y, address 172, Glennifer Hill Road, Ridgeburg, Pennsylvania, 18954.
Dimitri, did you participate in this Zoom meeting from its outset?
And did you have the opportunity to hear my testimony and the testimony of architect Rustin O 'Or?
And if you had the opportunity to testify, would you adopt his testimony and my testimony as your own and as true and correct?
I would.
Thank you. With that, I rest and ask that the board look upon this application as a unique situation in terms of the lot, the bridge abutment,
the opportunity for the engineering to basically handle and direct any stormwater away as testified by the architect.
We believe this project will not impact the property next door adversely.
It's in harmony with the code
and it's in harmony with the remaining houses
within a hundred feet or so.
And with that, I rest.
Thank you very much.
Does the board have any questions?
And there's no one else who would like to testify.
Madam Chair, we have Celeste Hardister
that's been unmuted.
She can unmute herself.
Yes, good afternoon.
Good afternoon, name and address please.
Leleste Hardister, C -E -L -E -S -T -E -H -A -R -D -E -S -T -E -R, 368 Green Lane, Philadelphia, 19128.
And do you swear our farm to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
Thank you.
This project was presented to the Central Voxboro Civic Association Zoning Committee.
I am the president of the of the CRCA. This was presented to the zoning committee before it first presented to the Wissahick and Neighbors Association, which is the coordinating RCO and recognizing that
that on steep slope, that property cannot be deemed to be undevelopable. We worked hard to
try to find solutions that would have the least impact on the steep slope and
thought that we had come, arrived at some ideas that the architect was interested in.
We are in opposition to the front yard parking. And actually, for all of the siting up and down
Schur's Lane of other parking garages, this property is RSA 5, which does not allow a parking
garage. And there is no front yard parking allowed. So this is certainly not within code
to have front yard parking here. The next door neighbor parks in front. There's not a permit
for that condition. So their parking is not legal. Are you speaking, excuse me, are you speaking on
behalf of yourself, a neighborhood or the RCO? The RCO. Okay. And I should say that that's my
understanding that the neighbor's parking is not legal. I was informed of that from another
member of our zoning committee. In terms of referencing up and down Shurs Lane, there is a
unique property directly across the street from this property that fronts both Shurs Lane and
then five stories up, it fronts Maniunk Avenue. And so this property that we're discussing today
offers a similar opportunity. And so we had hoped that considering that this property could not be
deemed to be undevelopable, which by the way, this property had been offered to the Central
Roxburgh Civic Association for free a few years ago because a prior owner found it to be
undevelopable. And indeed, we've heard that term a few times today. So the property that is
across the street faces both Manionk Avenue and Schur's Lane. And our zoning committee felt that
this would be an opportunity for a unique, another good opportunity for a uniquely designed home that
would also have less impact on the steep slope than has been recommended here. We were looking
to have it face on Manionk Avenue as well as have a Schur's Lane presentation. So between
between not working with us as we thought they were going.
between not working with us as we thought they were going to,
not coming up with a steep slope solution
that would be less invasive than their current plan.
And also because we oppose the front yard parking,
we are in opposition to this project.
Thank you.
We respond, Madam Chairman.
Yes, sure you may.
Yeah, so Celeste is correct.
We did appear before the Roxborough Group
as a courtesy. She asked us who we did. And we then went in front of the RCO in charge of this
project, President Joseph Bergen, and they didn't like, frankly, the reception I got
was not in favor of what was suggested by Manninghunk Neighborhood Council. So we're caught
in kind of a crossfire there not trying to alienate anybody because again you know Mr.
Lohr and I appear in front of community groups on a regular basis and we don't want to want any ill
will but you know we really had to go with what the RCO who is in charge of this project wanted
plus the suggestion made by Roxborough was that the you know the house go back and then
turn toward Matty Onk which was going to make our house a little bit deeper and then kind of you know
box in this gentleman's house and we just thought building the house back to the end of his house
and stopping and and so that all these homes would be in tandem was a uh was a better fit
and I don't I don't say me I meant the community group uh Wesley Hicken thought that
Councilor, can I ask you a question?
Sure, Ms. Holliman.
Is on -site parking necessary for this site?
Is it necessary?
I guess it's a difference between a want and a need.
I guess nothing in life is necessary,
but it certainly would help the situation
because the traffic is going uphill here
and there's no parking on this side of the street.
There is some parking here,
but again, the garage cuts, curb cuts
don't permit you to park.
So we looked at this and maybe your thought is,
well, if you're backing up, you have a situation,
but you have traffic coming uphill, not downhill.
If the traffic was coming downhill here,
I would agree that maybe a front loaded parking space
would not be the way to go.
Thank you.
Does anyone else on the board have questions?
Planning Commission?
Good afternoon, Chairwoman, members of the board.
Ian Litwin, Planning Commission staff.
This property is indicated for single -family residential use in the comprehensive plan.
due to conditions unique to this lot planning commission staff has no opposition to granting
the vans for steep slopes however we object to granting the vans for parking in the front yard
as this is prohibited in rsa 5. excuse me madam chair we have two hands up
okay tina marie russell you've been unmuted please unmute yourself
can you hear me yes i can can you put your can you put your name and address on the record
tina marie russell north central philadelphia cdc um okay do you swear all truth and nothing
but the truth i do okay you may proceed yeah i just have one statement and that is the fact that
he uh indicated that the coordinator had a different um comment or version than what they
would like to see whether an addition exists, excuse me, exclusively is not true. All RCOs
are able to weigh in on ZBA hearings. So that I just wanted to correct that statement that says
that he can only have to abide by the coordinator. The coordinator is just there to host the meeting,
but all RCOs get to weigh in on comments and conversations. And their responses are just as
equal their statements are considered should be considered as equal okay and there's someone else
who would like to speak joseph bergman you've been unmuted please unmute okay thank you madam
chairman good afternoon my name is joe bergen i am the president of the wisconsin neighbor civic
association um and i wanted to just address a couple points real quick uh the first is how we
And I want to just address a couple points real quick.
The first is how we voted.
The motion was to support the proposed variance, and that is why we only had one, and then
we had opposition, and that is five.
So it's very clear, at least from my standpoint, how we made the motion that we are opposed
to this.
I would like to acknowledge that the applicant did come back and did incorporate some brick
in the front. And overall, we remained opposed for the parking was the big issue. And I also
want to acknowledge Celeste Harding from our neighboring Civic on the steep slope issues.
I know they've worked very hard. And I think that's our position.
Okay, would it benefit anyone of you to go back and have a discussion?
I'm not opposed to that. I want to ensure that our neighboring civic has fully been heard.
And if that's what makes the most sense, I would agree to it.
Okay. I'm never against talking further.
Okay. Then we'll continue this. Do we have a date for
a hearing fatima not a hearing a continuance date
no it would have to be a resumption hearing so a resumption oh boy
and i do i need a date today for the resumption hearing
you do unless they're going to repost um is is there any benefit to a resumption hearing in this
case is there any likelihood of reaching an agreement
this is henry clinton i mean one never knows uh what can happen we've already had
three meetings and you know three three looks at this um and i don't want to put the board in a
difficult position um hank do you want me to describe very quickly about like what the
the differences between the two rcos and where that would be helpful if you could i can rustin
rustin before you do that what i want to know is where would people park um so basically if we do
not get the front loaded parking they would be subject to parking on the street um again on this
street there's only parking on one side and that is also extremely limited because there are so
many other garages and curb cuts so the area is already under you largely underserved by parking
um okay so you can continue with whatever you were going to say it might be helpful
hank if you could just go to the site plan that has the uh slopes on it the topography
because I think I actually yes this so I liked the idea of what um Roxborough Civic was suggesting
I thought it would have made a you know pretty cool building and what we were talking about
in order to do that and engage Maniunk Ave so Hank if you can see the building is shaded in
like a light gray there everybody and then the dark gray are like the structural bridge abutments
So we want to stay a comfortable distance away from them in case they ever need to be, like, maintained over time so that, you know, there's no issues or failure in the bridge.
I think that's important to everybody as a whole.
So in order to do that, we were looking at basically trying to connect to Manioc Ave on the back part of the building and pushing further into our rear yard in order to accommodate that, which we can do.
but we got a large sense of opposition from the coordinating RCO neighbors that live on
Manioc Avenue. The neighbor right behind us that fronts on Manioc Ave has windows in the side.
They did not want us to build any closer than we were. They also didn't want another home
connecting to Manioc Ave that close to the bridge because as you look across the bridge,
there's another home that has a connection on both streets. There's the front door on Manioc Ave,
and then they also have the garages and the space down bottom. So we were looking to do something
similar, which is what Roxborough Civic had suggested. But the coordinating RCO, all the
neighbors for the homes for the Manioc Ave homes right behind us had came out and did not want that.
So that's why Hank says that left us between a rock and a hard place. So we can keep going back,
but I'm still going to have neighbors behind us that don't want us to do that.
Madam Chairman, could I ask that this is continued? I have concern.
On behalf of our civic, could I ask that this is continued?
I have concerns that are neighboring civic concerns on the steep slope.
You know, we weren't heard enough from them, and I don't want any issues going forward on this project.
I don't know if I'm willing to do a resumption hearing.
Can the attorney weigh in on this?
uh it's the attorney meaning sharon saletta oh okay the you mean the attorney the attorney
right um this this is really the board's call whether to have a resumption hearing to allow
further conversation um if you decide not to do that i would suggest that you hold the vote for
week and voted after next week's executive session. Perhaps we can perhaps Madam Chairman
Celeste, Joe and I and Rustin can have a conversation and within the next three, four days
see if we can come to some resolution. If we can't we send a letter to you and tell you.
Okay. Can I ask what Celeste Harding's position on this continuance is please?
um we're i'm going to say that calendar number 0853 231 shares lane is going to be held for one
week and you all may be able to get together and come to some sort of resolution but the case will
be voted in one week okay and can i say um the record will be closed which would not preclude
you from submitting a letter requesting a resumption hearing because you believe that
there could be productive conversations with the RCO but as of now the record is closed and it will
be voted next week. Thank you very much. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, Madam Chair and members of
the board sure calendar number zero two three nine twenty three forty nine north 20th street
Is there anyone here on 2349 North 20th Street?
Excuse me, this is Sharon Saleta.
I have this case as withdrawn.
Okay, and I have it as no exhibits.
So 2349 North 20th Street, calendar number 0239 is withdrawn.
And I apologize for that.
I believe the request to withdraw didn't come in until today.
that's okay calendar number zero zero two two three thousand one kensington avenue
is there anyone here on this case it was listed before on october 14th there are also no exhibits
calendar number zero zero two two three thousand one kensington avenue this case is dismissed
calendar number zero two four six one north 16th street
zen are you there oh hello um name and address for the record
yes zen jin uh 16 7 z -h -e -n -j -i -n 1617 john f kennedy boulevard suite 1838 philadelphia pa
19103 here on behalf of the applicant you've already been sworn in do you agree to waive
the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy. I will agree to the reading of the
referral and stipulate to its accuracy. Okay, I stand corrected. Have you emailed the exhibit
packet with proof of ownership, tax compliance, refusal, referral, photos, plans, five days in
advance of this hearing, and have you met with the RCO and have a letter? Yes, to all questions.
Thank you. You may proceed. Thank you. This is an application I will share with the board the
documentation first so it's easier to see. This is a referral that was for a takeout restaurant
for a takeout restaurant in a zoning district that otherwise permits such use CMX2 commercial
in a zoning district that permits otherwise permit
district with no special overlay. As a special exception of course my client needs to establish
that this would not cause a hardship beyond what is normally expected of such use. In this case
the community is in support of the application. This is going to be in a portion of a building
in the back half of what is an existing grocery store. And this will be a restaurant, basic
American style and some, I don't want to say Spanish style foods for takeout. The operating
hours will be approximately 7am to 9pm each day, seven days a week. My client expects to have maybe
four to five employees at the location. The community likes the grocery store, which they
also operate. Compliments are given on the cleanliness. So the one issue that normally
is part of a restaurant use is going to be a non -issue because my client is someone who is
good on trash and maintaining cleanliness of the property. So as a result, we have support from
the community. And I believe without any further issues of trash and other items, my client would
meet the requirements for a special exception and we would ask for the board's favorable
ruling in this matter. I'm also going to just share the photos real quick. This is the back
half of the space as you can see the posters were placed. This has not been renovated yet
so please bear with me on the condition of the property but this will be fully renovated
and fit it out as a restaurant based on the plans.
So as you can see, the space does need work
and my client will have everything ready to go.
And this half here is the existing grocery,
which is the front half that is already in operation
and is well -liked by the neighborhood.
The layout is shown right here.
It is a simple takeout style restaurant
with some bench ceiling and some table seating available,
but primarily the business expect to be serving customers over the counter for takeout.
Okay. And you've met with the RCO?
Yes. The letter from Nicetown Tioga team is attached.
Now, my client should be here with us, McGill.
I don't know if he is able to confirm my testimony.
Is anyone raising their hand?
Miguel, I think you may have two devices active. Can you make sure only one is on? Otherwise,
it'll echo badly. Okay. Yes. Can you hear me now? Yes. Thank you. Yes. Sir,
can you put your name and address on the record? Yes. My name is Miguel Peralta Rodriguez.
So, 522 Aspen Road, Cheltenham, Pennsylvania, 1912.
Excuse me, can you spell your last name for me, please?
Peralta is my last name.
My two last names are Rodriguez.
Peralta Rodriguez.
P -E -R -A -L -T -A.
I'm sorry.
P -E -R -A -L -T -A.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
okay thank you um mr peralta you heard my testimony before the board and my representations
can you verify that they're true and correct and adopted as your own yes i do thank you
thank you does the board have any questions no planning commission
good afternoon chairwoman members of the board ian litwin planning commission staff
This property is indicated for commercial mixed use in the comprehensive plan.
The proposed special exception meets the criteria for approval in the zoning code,
and therefore Planning Commission staff has no opposition to granting a special exception.
Thank you.
Calendar number 0246 -3401 North 16th Street.
My vote is yes.
My vote is yes.
My vote is yes.
My vote is yes.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Have a good evening.
Thank you.
Thank you very much.
Calendar number 2496 -4055 Richmond Street.
We're waiting for Sean Ward.
good afternoon madam chair members of the board sean ward on behalf of the applicant
Good afternoon, Madam Chair.
hi can you put your name and address on the record and then i'll swear you in
no you're already sworn in just name and address yes john ward 331 east street road trevos pennsylvania
19053 okay do you agree to wave and stip yes i do and have you emailed the exhibit packet with
proof of ownership tax compliance refusal referral photos and or plans of the property five days in
advance of this hearing and have you met with the rco and do you have a letter yes yes and yes
thank you you may proceed
okay we see my screen yes awesome uh madam chair i've had i've submitted my typical exhibit packet
I am here on behalf of KTV, LLC, the owner of the property, and Woodstock Power Company, the proposed tenant at 4055 Richmond Street.
In my exhibit packet, I have A1 as the ZBA application, A2, the notice of refusal.
This is the permit for warehouse and storage in an existing building and yard.
It was refused due to the Northeast Overlay District.
The property is zoned ICMX, which would permit the proposed use.
but we need a use variance from the northeast overlay district a3 is the zoning application
a4 project information form a5 proof of ownership a6 tax compliance a7 is the site plan a8 are
photographs hosting subject property and street views we have two letters of support one is from
the 45th ward democrat rco and the other is from the port richmond on patrol and civic other known
as otherwise known as PROPAC.
If the council person, it's Bobby Heenan, so he doesn't submit letters,
but if it was or if there is, I would ask that to be marked A11.
We have Robin's zoning history.
The last permit on file was for a warehouse and storage for a plumbing
and heating company.
Its most recent use from the photographs is a transportation company
with yellow school buses and other types of private transportation.
87 was a truck and trailer repair, auto body, fender, warehouse and storage.
78, a private parking lot.
77, again, truck and trailer, storage and leasing.
69, truck repair and storage garage.
68, garage and repair shop.
And back in 1941, it was an auto sales lot.
A13 and 14 are the zoning map and aerial photographs.
So very quickly, we have the application of appeal.
We have the notice of refusal.
I stand corrected. It's ICMX. Yeah, ICMX. I might have said IRMX. It's ICMX.
Now, I would point out that prior to this, it was zoned least restrictive industrial due to the remapping.
I believe in 2012, possibly, it was remapped ICMX.
And then most recently, the Northeast Overlay District regulations were adopted to preserve industrial and manufacturing parcels and properties.
So then we have the project information form, a copy of KTV's deed, tax compliance, as you can see, taxes are due for 21.
They're not due until March.
It's just more or less a square -shaped building on the lot.
We have the posting.
Hold on a second.
As you can see, the structure is a warehouse.
It's got bay doors along Lewis Street.
It's got bay doors on the interior of the lot.
An aerial photograph.
So it's a large lot consisting of 20, 40, 11 to 55 Richmond Street.
Again, another aerial.
This is Richmond Street facing north.
Richmond Street facing south.
The subject is on the corner of Lewis Street.
This is a view from Lewis Street.
Across Lewis Street is the Conrail tracks.
Here is the letter from Harry Engasser, 45th Ward Leader for the 45th Ward Democratic RCO, indicating their support for the project after our meeting.
Again, PROPAC reviewed the application with us, and they support the request, acknowledging that it used to be least restrictive zoned, and both indicating that the warehouse and storage use has been in place.
and then copies of all the zoning permits,
some of which you'll see indicate the...
Hold on a second.
i think we got it okay uh on the line i have uh roy rouvina uh he he should have raised his hand
I think we got it.
On the line, I have...
uh roy if you're there raise your hand and unmute yourself once you're permitted areas
i'm here okay roy put your name can you put your name and address on the record please
Roy Ravini, R -O -H -I -R -E -U -V -E -N -I, 292 Montgomery Avenue, Bala Canwood, PA, 19004.
Thank you.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
Thank you.
Roy, you've heard my representations to the board today?
I did.
And are they true and correct at the best of your knowledge, information, and belief?
They are.
And would you adopt them as your own testimony?
I will.
Thank you, Madam Chair.
That's all we have.
Thank you. Planning Commission?
Good afternoon, Chairwoman, members of the Board, Ian Litwin, Planning Commission staff.
This property is indicated for industrial commercial mixed use in a comprehensive plan.
Planning Commission has no opposition to granting the variance.
Okay, does the Board have any questions?
I hope somebody else is there okay calendar number two four nine six four zero five five
Richmond Street my vote is yes anybody else uh with the hand raise nobody raised their hand
my vote is yes the vote is yes my vote is yes madam chair thank you very much and have a good
evening thank you you as well calendar number is that um number eight calendar number zero zero
seven eight eight four two dash five four red lion road
I have no record of having received exhibits in this case and this is at least the second
listing okay and there are no hands up
calendar number zero zero seven eight eight forty two dash fifty four red lion road this
case is dismissed dismissed dismissed thank you madam chair members of the board
thank you i think that completes the 330 hearings
it does thank you daren do not tell me there are add -ons please
no they're you've taken care of all the add -ons you're done thank you um see everybody next week