but that the participating RCOs which are the other RCOs of course can participate and that
the mere designation of an RCO as a coordinating RCO does not in and of by itself grant that
coordinating RCO with any more strength or vigor or leadership other than setting up that meeting
and hosting that meeting and being the coordinator if if that is different then i think um you know
this board needs to needs to say that it's not my understanding that it's anything different than
that mr chair there's a reason why it's generally acknowledged that the coordinating rco although
they don't have they're not the be-all to everything they preference is given to them
to conduct the meetings and give its support or non-support.
That doesn't exclude the other RCOs from having taken a position.
I mean, Mr. Bondi, you've been dealing with this stuff a long time.
I'm not sure where you're going with this line of questioning.
The RCO, the building sits on front and south.
This building is within the boundaries of the South Street Head House District.
I can't imagine it saying, no disrespect to my friends in Society Hill, that they would be the coordinating RCO.
No, no. I'm not suggesting anybody else should be the coordinating RCO, although it may be the case.
In fact, my understanding is that Councilman Squilla usually says that for residential projects on South,
that Queen Village
Queen Village is the coordinating RCO. I'm not aware of that. There's no evidence of that.
is the coordinating RCO.
I'm not aware of that.
I'm not aware.
I don't, I don't, Mr. Anastasia, let me go, please. I'm sorry, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Bonnie, I'm not aware of that for the four and a half plus years I've been here.
You might be right, but I don't ever recall that statement being made by Councilman Squill.
I'll move on. Please do. The next bullet, Mr. Weiner,
Did you have input into preparing this next bullet?
Primary hardship is the 100 block of South Street itself.
Mr. Chairman, I object.
The job of his attorney, my client's attorney, is to put together legal arguments pursuant to hardship.
My client is not burdened with that.
So now there's some insolent on between a rock and a hard place.
i have facts being put into evidence by an attorney and he's prohibiting the client from
from being cross-examined i don't think he's prohibiting him she said he's just stating a
fact look mr weiner has testified that he has not done any major development he has an architect
he has an attorney i'm sure he conferred with them on the options for this property what will
make sense economically and and that's how it's done you do it with your clients
mr wiener mr wiener do you have knowledge of other existing open restaurants on this
side of the block that you're i object what the relevance of that question what and by the way
the disrespect to the chair for not even answering the chairman's question to mr body thank you but
I'll handle it. Thank you. What relevance is it that there may be another restaurant or
restaurants on that block that are currently operating? Are you suggesting that we don't
need any more restaurants on that block? No, I'm suggesting that the evidence being put into the
record here is that there are vacancies, nail salon, check cashing, trinket store, and then
garages and that uh it's pretty clear to me and i think to the chairman that there are other
businesses on that block um and that uh indeed there's a wedding gown store that i believe is
in operation and i am asking i'm trying to get that into the record and if verne is allowed to
cherry pick i'm allowed to fill in the other cherries sounds like you're cherry picking to me
with all due respect but continue i i don't i don't understand the line of questioning
my client is not responsible for what i present to this board secondly okay okay okay secondly
to be clear what i said was hold on vernon vernon vernon please hold i'm sorry i'm sorry yes can i
interrupt. Mr. Bonny, it is common for protestants to point to surrounding conditions, surrounding
uses. Those are a matter of public record. They can be found in the zoning files, the
atlas files. So if you would like to identify other businesses in the immediate area, I
don't think there's anything prohibiting you from doing that it wouldn't necessarily have to be from
this witness you can identify them yourself and if i heard of mr anastasio's opening statements
somewhere in the opening statement that mr weiner is basically accommodating the desire of the south
street head house district and some of the near neighbors to activate that first floor as a
restaurant. That I assume, I shouldn't assume, but that may not have been Mr. Wiener's first
intention. Well, I could speak to that. I don't think that's actually accurate. I don't think
what Mr. Anastasia conveyed was accurate, but let's, let's go to the next page, please.
Could I see the second page of your letterhead, please?
Vern, yeah.
Okay, I don't think I have any other questions on that page.
I guess I'll just ask Mr. Wiener, is he aware of any hardship other than the arguments put forth so far?
um put forth so far seems that the neighborhood has a hardship that it's missing an anchor tenant
for a nice restaurant and people to live near that restaurant and patronize that restaurant
so just trying to add the restaurant and some more nice people anything else
that's it thank you mr anastasio you're muted
it. I have no further questions for this witness. Thank you. Thank you. Who else do you have,
Mr. Bonney? When you get Mr. Piven on? Well, yeah, but I didn't know it was our turn.
I believe Mr. Anastasio, I thought, have we completed the testimony with your architect?
yeah max is uh max and i believe uh rich has given everything rich have you given everything
you needed to give to the board yes i have yeah again you know mr wiener should not be
taxed with having to identify a hardship we've been through that we've been through that well
mr chair i have some documents to present but i would you know suggest that mr piven should go
first and that I could go second. That's fine. Mr. Piven, please identify yourself with the record,
spell your name, and I'll swear you in.
Chair, he's coming in now as a panel. Thank you.
Mr. Chair, respectfully, I need to, of course, for the record, object to anything Mr. Piven says
with respect to the position of QVNA.
They did not follow the rules
and or regulations of the code.
You can ask Mr. Piven that question
as to why that material is not submitted to you.
Thank you.
Once he gets on.
They are coordinating RCO in close proximity.
And I think it's fair that Mr. Piven
get the opportunity to testify.
I agree, sir.
But they did not count the votes of the people
who are in the room.
I'm going to ask that question.
You'll ask that question.
Thank you, sir.
Mr. Piven out there.
Sir, you can unmute yourself.
Unmute.
Peter, please spell your last name
and I'll swear you in.
My last name is spelled P as in Peter,
I, V as in Victor, E, N.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth,
the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
I do. Thank you. Mr. Piven, please begin. I am the chair of the Queen Village Neighbors Association
Zoning Committee. We are delegated with responsibility to address all but a few
zoning matters that come before Queen Village Neighbors Association. We were a designated,
we are a designated RCO with South Street Head House. They were designated coordinating.
They and we understood that we were equal in authority and responsibility. You can ask Mike
Harris that. I am sure he will agree. In fact, we hosted the community meeting on October 13th,
And we control that meeting. As to Mr. Anastasio's very eloquent presentation today, I don't hope to be nearly as eloquent as he is, but I think I do intend and expect to be honest and not to withhold information as he did.
I'll reiterate
something that he said
that we did not take a vote
we have learned
that taking a vote is
not in the best interest of the community
because the meeting gets stacked
and we expressed
at the beginning something
that Mr. D'Anastasio
quoted we make our
decisions based on
our decisions
decisions based on our experience in dealing with these things and what is in the best
interest of the neighborhood. We overlap responsibility for South Street. We overlap
it with South Street Head House. That's why we are both RCOs. However, they are a business
district, not a neighborhood association. Our interest is the entire community, particularly
including residences, because there are more of that than anything else. Now I would like to
Now I would like to advise you all something that you probably read, at least I hope you read, why we are hearing this project in the first place.
advise you all something that you
It is because the applicant asked for variances, and they were refused.
And I would like to tell you what those variances are requested and why, because we haven't heard that yet today.
The proposed use is refused for the following. Maximum multifamily household living units, seven. What they proposed were 18, and they came down to 13, thinking they were doing us a favor.
The proposed zoning is refused also for the following, and I'll give you the most important. Maximum height in feet, 38. Proposed, 65.75. Again, they felt they were doing someone a favor by coming down to 60 feet and three quarters, not 38 feet.
So they are against the code that is required in this district.
When the code, the RM1, was enacted, it was enacted for a reason.
And although I am not one of the people that was influential in that enactment, there are people who appeared that said they were involved and it is the appropriate code for the district.
I don't recall Mr. Anastasio mentioning that. So yes, they lowered the height from 65 to 60 feet, and that presented, when complete, a height that was 85% beyond what was allowed, right?
The height exceeded by 65%, excuse me, and the number of units presented exceeded by 85%.
So I think I will leave that.
That is fact, folks, fact.
It's not opinion.
The opinion we've heard is that this is going to present, this project as designed, will
present a gateway and an anchor.
If you look up the definition of gateway as I did, you will find this is not a gateway.
An anchor is ill-defined. Will it bring more people to the neighborhood? I hope it does.
We are as anxious for South Street to be successful as the business district is. We want a complete
neighborhood and our record in helping the neighborhood achieve it is exemplary. I think,
I think I'm going to leave it at that. The zoning is there for a reason. These people are,
they knew what they were buying when they bought it. And so their hardship is not the result of
what they bought. It is the result. They bought it hoping, I guess, that they could get the zoning
changed. We in the business, and that's the attorneys and the realtors and the neighborhood
people, we know what the other word for that is. It's spot zoning. Thank you for your attention.
Piven, would you agree, your statement was, we were anxious, we'd like to see more people.
Wouldn't you agree that a higher number of units would actually help increase the number of people
who will be, you know, walking and going back and forth from this apartment building and the
restaurant? Wouldn't that achieve the goal that you said you'd like to see achieved?
It might be inevitable, but I suppose you could build it to 100 feet and that might provide a
few more. We're not going to 100. I understand where you want to go. The question is whether
it's appropriate to do that. There were neighbors in the audience that were against this proposal,
primarily for reasons of height and mass. There were people in the neighborhood that were for it,
many of them simply to replace a decrepit building. No one can fault that. I won't fault that.
But to overbuild the site to the detriment of the neighborhood for perfectly valid reasons with
respect to height limitations and density limitations, that's just a step too far.
Understood. Thank you. Any questions for Mr. Piven?
Any questions for Mr. Piven?
No, Mr. Chairman.
Byrne, you're muted.
No questions.
Mr. Anastasio, you need to unmute yourself.
Byrne?
let me ask is mr weiner still on
okay i'm sorry uh mr chairman i i think i was i was i was unmuted by the i think the
administrator but thank you i had a question for mr weiner uh how long have you owned this property
uh it's a loaded question but i believe it was 2017 um and just to address mr piven i did not
buy this property we were actually the bank we loaned money to mr centipante in 2012 and then
after a long long stint with him we finally foreclosed um so it's not that i bought this
property to rezone it and build something massive here it's that i'm trying to fix a problem that i
inherited. And I do have a question for Mr. Piven, Mr. Chairman, if you don't mind. Yep, Mr. Piven,
that's why I'm here. Thank you, Peter. Thank you so much. And again, thank you for hosting us
the other evening. On behalf of my client and the architect, I do appreciate your hospitality
and the way in which you ran your meeting.
Sir, are you aware of the comments that I presented to the board today
of the vast majority of the Queen Village Neighbors Association members
who support the redevelopment of this site?
I will acknowledge that there were people in the audience that expressed support.
I will not acknowledge that it was the vast majority.
Okay, that's very good.
If you didn't care to count, you didn't care to count.
That's fine.
But could we put on the record that you and your board decided to make a decision irrespective of the very many expressions of support to redevelop this particular parcel?
Is that right?
No, you may not do that.
That is not why we did it.
We took all of the comments into account. We always face the fact that we are going to have neighbors for and neighbors against. And we exercise our good judgment. We are professional on that committee. So it is not material that there were more people making supportive comments than negative comments. I don't know how many there were.
okay so you never really actually took a vote you've said that before mr anastasio i just