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.