Entonces, ¿esa otra fotografía que vi no es que estaba cortada la cera ni nada?
Muy bien.
Gracias.
Preguntas de nuestro abogado.
Preguntas o comentarios de la audiencia virtual.
Good morning.
This is Dana Dabney and I will be your co-host this morning chair and I see no hands.
Thank you very much.
Muy buenos días.
¿La Comisión de Aplanación?
Good morning.
Liz Fuseli, L-I-Z, last name Fuseli, F-U-S-E-L-I-E-R, with Philadelphia.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Please proceed.
Muy bien.
The conference of Clinton recommends no change to the RSA3 residential single family attached zoning at this location.
Muy bien, entonces, yo soy Liz Fusley y esto es lo que yo considero, la Junta Comprensiva recomienda que no se haga ningún cambio según la zona, según la ley de zonificación de RZ3 de uso de una sola unidad familiar.
recommendations in their comprehensive plan la ciudad rezonificar rezonificó este vecindario
La ciudad rezonificó este vecindario en 1971 de acuerdo a las recomendaciones en su plan comprensivo.
No hay ninguna circunstancia física única o condiciones de la propiedad que la propiedad
The City Planning Commission recommends that the Board deny the proposed variances for fence height and opacity.
Thank you.
rechace las varianzas propuestas para la altura y opacidad del cerco mi2024-005-972-4530
Blankiston Street, I vote yes.
M-I-2-0-2-4-0-0-5-9-7-2-4-5-3-0,
Calle Blankiston, yo voto sí.
Cheryl Gaston, my vote is yes.
Cheryl Gaston, mi voto es sí.
Tenetta Graham, mi voto es sí.
Tenetta Graham, mi voto es sí.
Ryan McAdams, my vote is yes.
thank you sir for coming in you have your your votes thank you thank you interpreter thank you
very much for your help we appreciate it it's always a pleasure see you next time your honor
okay we're going to move on to number four mi 2025 001 462 2245 north 17th street this is a
resumptive hearing vernon anastasio is the attorney
morning mr chair members of the board morning good morning council could you please
state your name and spell for the stenographer. Yes, it's Vern Anastasio, A-N-A-S-T-A-S-I-O,
on behalf of Mr. Rudy Tafani. Okay. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth,
the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? Yes, sir. Council, this is a
resumptive hearing. We'll go to you first for supplemental information. Then we'll have
questions from the board. We'll go back to the public with limited testimony relative to what
you say today and then we'll see where planning is okay so why don't you thank you yep initially
this was for an application for a three-family dwelling and we did present our plans there were
a list of items that the board had asked us to address and we have done so as the plans show
we have eliminated all basement bedrooms and we shrunk the bath in the basement
to a half bath instead of a full bath.
We have dedicated trash areas for each of the units.
Interior, as you can see here, where my cursors are.
Over here, over here, and of course in the rear.
And we've reduced the first floor unit to a one-bedroom unit.
We'll have a little home office and some flex space in the basement.
That was the totality of the of the requests and the, the issues that the board brought up. Sure. And questions from the board at any time that the RCO ever get back know about notice notice of these new plants or or not.
We sent the revised plans to the RCO and there's no word back from them. No, ma'am. Okay.
other questions but questions from our attorney
um just to confirm the roof deck that was originally proposed um in these plans that
has been eliminated correct that's correct and that was per the rco itself okay all right thank
you questions or comments from the virtual audience i see no hands chair planning commission
planning commission good morning liz fuzely on behalf of the planning commission the
good morning liz usually on behalf of the planning committee
comprehensive plan recommends no change to the rsa 5 residential single-family zoning at this
location the city rezoned this neighborhood in 2014 in accordance with recommendations
in the comprehensive plan at that time this block face was zoned rm1 residential multi-family
we are aware of several two to three bed three unit buildings but the majority of
Homes on this block face are single family, the city planning commission recommends that the board deny the proposed use variance for 3 dwelling units.
So, chair, just as a brief reminder, my client, my client purchased this this was RM1. He had invested the time and the energy to get to get going and then found out later that the zoning had changed.
It's also lots of uninvestment on this block, so the density is actually needed.
Thank you.
MI 2025, 001-462-2245 North 17th Street, I vote yes with proviso.
No household living in the basement, no roof deck or roof deck access to the structure.
Cheryl Gaston, my vote is yes, with provisos.
Tanetta Graham, my vote is yes, with proviso.
Ryan McAdams, my vote is yes, with proviso.
Paya Nguyen, my vote is yes, with proviso.
Thank you.
Thank you, counsel.
We're going to go to number six and seven.
mi2025007194209 wadley street
and number seven here is
and number seven is mi 2025 007 534 211 east wally street council could you state your name
and spell for the stenographer good morning mr chairman and members of the board adam laver of
blank rome on behalf of wilde street partners llc and its principal henry siebert s-i-e-b-e-r-t
mr siebert uh was with us for the first hearing in person he's participating virtually uh this
morning do you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth
yes chairman bergman i do council yes uh
Chairman and members of the board, I am Travis Niffin, attorney with the streets department.
Excuse me, this is the reporter. I am not hearing counsel.
Counsel, just get it a little closer to you. That's our floor.
All right. I'm Travis Niffin. Niffin is K-N-I-F-F-I-N. I'm here on behalf of the streets department.
You swear or firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
I do. Okay. So I guess for the both of you, we were debating this morning exactly where we stand
and we believe you're up to the point where questions from the board. Is there anything else?
Mr. Chairman, that's where the board left it at the last hearing.
We'll start. Questions from the board.
Questions or comments from our attorney?
you know not at this time Mr. chair questions or comments from the virtual audience I see no hands
chair planning commission good morning Liz Fusely on behalf of the planning commission
community sorry take your time correct
the comprehensive plan recommends no change to the rsa 5 residential single-family zoning
at 209 or 211 east wilde street the city rezoned this neighborhood in 2015 in a community requested
sorry in a community requested map change and in accordance with recommendations in the
comprehensive plan accessory off street parking is a common condition on this block face
however as we've stated in other applications the city cannot guarantee that a compact vehicle
will always park in this space a full-size vehicle would overhang the sidewalk and impede pedestrian
access the city planning commission recommends that the board deny the proposed variances
for this application.
for this application. Okay, so we sat and debated this morning where we were to be now.
Okay, so
we sat in
How about if each one of you take two minutes to summarize? Is that two minutes enough?
I think that that's achievable, Mr. Chairman. So why don't we go first here and then we'll come to you.
Very good. Mr. Chairman and members of the board, this case is in my 25 years or so
before this board highly unusual to uh to have the streets department sitting in the other chair
there is a process uh under the city code and the rules of municipal government
for the streets department's independent review of applications and we have
cooperated with that and shall continue to cooperate with that through the process appeals
for example of the streets department determinations are not before do not come before the zoning board of adjustment.
We have heard the planning commission speak about the nature of the neighborhood, and the board will recall, although it's several months ago that the entire side of this block is single family residential.
We have shared with the board that we have a young family that cannot wait to move in to this home with their children and be a part of a thriving community, and we have the coordinating RCO of record in support and noting extensively in its support the need for off-street parking and the constrictions on this particular block that we are not taking away public parking.
additionally this board uh let's let's hone in on the issues that are before the board the legal
issues this board determined hardship at this site uh in 1987 when the board granting variance
relief for residential development along the entire span of this side of uh of willdy street
from shaka max and through to day street this is really simply coming before the board due to a
subdivision and construction of new homes in place of a prior residential dwelling the board also
noted uh or the record i should say indicates that the 1987 plans included the requisite streets
department approvals for the entire block nothing has changed here mr chairman and members of the
board nothing at all the proposed zoning site plan that we've presented is consistent with
the conditions along the street the plan conforms to what had previously been approved by the zoning
board of adjustment by the streets department and in fact uh with the recommendation uh according
to the records that i've reviewed of the philadelphia city planning commission
surface parking is prohibited that's that's a refusal uh we see the conditions that show that
this is within the scope of what's along the block it is not different that's factually quite
important in addition to this board having found hardship before similarly the proposed parking
not being accessed from the front street every home along shaka maxon street today's street
along willie has documented front uh loaded parking on this side and we saw that there are
some instances on the other side as well the street is narrow there are existing curb cuts
there is a prohibition uh effectively on viable on-street parking we also saw in the immediate
vicinity uh wrapping around the street other examples but most importantly let's step back
for a moment and i'll and i'll end with this let's step back and and look at this site we are not
talking about a high intensity use we uh we are talking about single family low impact and that
mr chairman and members of the board i would submit is why we have the support of the community
and extensive support of near neighbors thank you thank you council yes members of the board thank
you do me a favor just make sure the mic is close to you sure members of the board thank you perfect
uh going on two and a half months ago i think we gave our opening statements and i'm going to say
something similar to what i said then you know streets department while it may be somewhat
procedurally unusual the streets department has a home rule charter and city code empowered right
to perform its own review and in this case mr siebert and mr laver point out that there's a
1980 they bring up a 1987 document that yes it's real yes it's signed off on by the zba by
yes it's real yes it's signed off on by the zba by lni by streets but it's also true that that
that document created certain rights for property owners but those rights were not exercised and
under 14 303 of the city code if you don't exercise a right you lose it and mr mr labor
also repeated just now and and about two months ago that nothing has changed nothing has changed
Well, in fact, a lot has changed, right? Not only do those rights no longer exist, but more importantly, the site has changed.
You know, it wasn't until 1990 that the ADA was passed and then sometime after that, we built this, somebody built this ADA ramp.
There are utility poles on the site that were not there previously.
And the state of the art of traffic engineering has changed streets now has a policy of not recommending of not permitting curb cuts that are less than 75 feet from an intersection.
This one is a matter of like it's about 5 feet.
Mr. labor also points out that there is an aesthetic theme going on in the neighborhood with I guess one curb cut per home, and maybe 2 spaces per home.
um that's a question of visual harmony but what streets reviewed here was the safety
of putting in a new curb cut one that did not pre-exist one that was never built
pursuant to the rights of the 1987 um approval and one that presents new site-specific safety
challenges. And so for that reason, my client, the department believes it is unsafe for an
additional curb cut to be built so close to that intersection. Thank you. Okay. I want to thank
the both of you for your presentations. And let me say that I certify that I've watched the video
from the prior hearing and also read numerous pages that Hillary sent me of notes from the
meeting. So what we're going to do is we're going to vote on this next week.
Next Wednesday morning, we'll vote at 9.30 a.m.
Okay. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, members of the board.
Thank you both of you. All right. Should the board require any additional
information, we're happy to provide it. Right. Thank you. Thank you.
Number one.
Thank you. Number one, MI 2021 004-541-251 Ripka Street. David Orfanides is the attorney and Joshua Griner is also representing the Protestants.
Good morning. We'll start with David. David, could you please state your name and spell for the stenographer?
There we go. David, last name is spelled O. R. P. H. A. N. I. D. E. S.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth? I do. Council, could you do the same? Yes. Good morning, Mr. Chairman, members of the board, Joshua Grimes, G. R. I. M. E. S. Right.
And I am representing the Heritage Place Owners Association.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
So obviously there's been a lot of testimony that we've had in the past.
Our records indicate, David, that you will have your client adopt your testimony at this point.
Does that sound right?
I listened to the recording and it was a little hard at the end.
So one was to adopt, and the second one was, there was another point where I said he was going to speak to his involvement in the appraisal.
I think there were two things that I said. It was a little hard to hear.
We'll start there, okay?
And then I understand where you'll then put on your presentation, am I correct?
Or you did some of it, I mean, but...
No, Mr. Chair, the first hearing that we did, I did...
got your presentation but you had your clients that were sitting here you wanted to get them
done all right yes that's correct unless the board you know i'm certainly welcome to answer
questions nope nope nope quit but you're pointing your finger well i'm not pointing at anybody in
particular so i'm kind of doing doing more like this bill clinton but um the uh i think we were
but um the uh i think we were finishing with my my uh my witnesses but i still wanted to run through