want peter i just want to make sure we understand for the right for the record and i don't it's
not disparaging i just want to make sure we have it for the record again i respect everything you
do uh having known qvna for a very long time and your process you never really took a vote
on how the immediate neighbors would feel
about the redevelopment of this particular parcel.
Is that right?
Mr. Anastasia, why are you grilling me?
You presented that.
I'm just asking you, sir.
I'm sorry.
I'm sorry.
I'm sorry.
Just to ask you a question.
This is Tanya, the administrator.
Can you please just answer the questions
so we can move on?
It's 5.15.
Question again, please.
Vernon, you're still muted. Vernon, you're muted.
Mr. Anastasio, he has confirmed several times that they did not take a vote.
And the reasons why. Vernon, you're still muted.
Vernon, you're muted.
Could anyone hear me? I can hear you. Yeah, I can hear you.
I was unable to unmute myself, but now I am, and I thank the administrator for that.
Just for the record, you did not take a poll or a tally of the vote as to who supported
the redevelopment of this revised plan as opposed to who did not.
Is that correct?
That's correct.
Thank you.
And that's all I have, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Peter.
Thank you, Peter.
I'm ready.
Mr. Bonney?
I'm ready if Vern can relinquish control of the screen please. Sure.
I'm ready.
If Vern can relinquish control of the screen, please.
Okay, thank you.
Okay, I'll be as brief as possible. This is our letter that you've seen.
This, whoops, I think we have, let's see here.
This is our form. This is our footprint. And as you can see, the property I've tried to circle in green touches our footprint. It's the first property next to our footprint.
We have just a context photo put together by our association that shows the sidewalk dimensions with the extension bump outs that I think are still there from Downey's.
As the chairman may know, it gets awfully narrow walking on that particular stretch, especially with the streetlights and whatnot.
I thought I heard Mr. Anastasia or the architects say they were reducing that, they were pulling it back in closer, if I heard that correctly.
I think the length, but the record will be what it is.
I think so. I just want to show also the board on the bottom of the screen, the block. This is the north side of the first block of South Street.
And as you can see, all of the, it looks to me, you can draw your own conclusions, but all of the buildings on the north side of this block of South Street seem to be three stories.
Maybe there's one with four stories at the other corner, but it is what it is, and I think the photo sort of speaks for itself, and so I'll let it speak for itself.
I think you also know, I don't think it's too much of a stretch to say that the board chair and other members of the board know that there's, I think, a thriving Pietro's pizza restaurant on that block.
There's a Thai food restaurant on that block that does pretty well.
And then here, I'm going to ask you to ignore the bottom drawings because those were before the applicant took off five feet.
So the bottom ones aren't really accurate in that they're five, five and a half, five feet, maybe five and change too high.
But the top ones, including, let's say, the top middle one that shows existing buildings from the east.
So that is the, you know, more of the block of Front Street, which is the context for this property.
To the extent that Mr. Anastasio made a argument that this property is zoned incorrectly, I don't think there's any evidence to that.
This is the City of Philadelphia's central district plan talking about the need to rezone a lot of properties in Center City, but not this stretch.
In fact, just along South Street, there is right here, across the street, some rezoning might be appropriate to align the uses to the existing land use.
So I think it's fair to say that if the city of Philadelphia thought that this block of South Street on the north side should be rezoned, they would have flagged it in this district plan.
Finally, well, not finally, but next, I want to say if we're looking for a gateway to this end of South Street, we have a gateway, literally, to this end of South Street.
I don't think people coming across this bridge, which there's going to be a lot of people coming in the future across this bridge from the river to South Street are not going to know which street South Street is.
And just very quickly, I want to show that on this particular block, there's a wedding gown store that is currently being renovated and redeveloped with two stories above the first floor retail.
This is the buy right approved plans from the city Atlas materials showing that they are 38 feet high at the rooftop right.
materials showing that they are 38 feet high at the rooftop right here. Next, I'm going to show
just very briefly Bridget Foy's, which is exactly one block away, which is 38 feet high at the
cornice line. And then there's a parapet, I'm sorry, 30, well, let's take a quick look.
32 feet to the cornice line, 39 feet to the parapet, to the top of the roof, 43 feet.
This is also, by the way, by the same architect that's in front of you today,
ambit architecture. I think that we can all acknowledge that Bridget Foy's, which with its,
this indicates three dwelling units, three dwelling units above the restaurant,
is a going concern. And that's, I guess, just in closing, I'd say there's been zero hardship
demonstrated. To say that you can't make the numbers work on this zoning classification
is not a hardship. That's nothing unique to this property. That would be attributable. That argument
would also go to any of the zoning classifications on this block and in this area. That is a
disagreement. That is a complaint about the law. That is not a complaint about the property. That
is a complaint about the law and that complaint does not belong here at the zoning board because
it cannot support a claim of hardship that complaint goes to city council and to the
planning commission and to ask for a rezoning of the property which i would doubt the city of
philadelphia would do but if that discussion is to be had at the planning commission or the city
council we're happy to we're happy to be part of that discussion i'm sure queen village i don't
and speak for them, but they may want to be part of that discussion also. But at the end of the
day, once the old down is demolished, this will be a vacant, perfectly rectangular parcel or
combination of parcels in the city, in central, in center city, Philadelphia. And there's zero
hardship. Zero is a nada, zip, squat, bupkis, the big goose egg. I don't think that a variance
granted in this case, let alone variances for way over the height, way over the number
of units, I don't think that that's a sustainable decision. And I want to thank you for hearing
me out and uh uh i hope you deliberate um and come to the right decision thank you mr chair
madam vice chair thank you everyone okay mr chairman i only have a couple uh items to
counter on that i'll be really quick i promise you don't break your promise
you know i won't carol i never break from mr anastasio since i believe there are other people
waiting to testify. Would you rather hold your comments until they've been heard? Yes, that's
fine. Thank you. Okay. Anyone else would like to testify in this case, please raise your hand.
It's so sweet. We have Naomi, please unmute you. Naomi, please spell your full name and I'll
I'll swear you in.
Ms. Naomi, you need to unmute yourself.
We have Sam, we can move on, Chair, we have Sam.
Move to the next part.
Sam, please spell your full name and I'll swear you in.
he's been allowed to speak sir
anyone else out in the audience while we're waiting
we have mike harris i'll allow him to speak yeah mike harris please spell your full name
identify yourself and i'll swear you in um thank you mr chairman um mike harris uh m-i-k-e-h-a-r-r-i-s
uh i figured since my name's been invoked a few times i should at least uh let you know i'm here
yeah just for the record uh tell everybody who you are yes sir yes i'm the executive director
of the south street head house business improvement district you swear a firm to tell the truth the
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Thank you, sir.
Thank you, sir. Please proceed.
Thank you. I just wanted to clarify a couple of things or answer any further questions.
To Mr. Piven's point, I believe I'm looking at the refusal.
The zoning district for this property is CMX1, not RM1.
There is RM1 on the block, but this parcel is a CMX1 zoned lot.
Also, to Mr. Bonnie's point, the wedding shop has closed.
They moved and closed, so they're not a viable business on the block anymore.
The block currently has about eight viable businesses and five vacancies,
so we're sitting at about a 30% vacancy rate on that block.
I just wanted to make that a point of fact.
The third is we have had three as the coordinating RCO, along with QB&A and Society Hill.
We have had three hearings, as articulated in my letter, August 4th, September 9th,
and October 13th. I think all that was detailed in my summary letter. And so we have met three
times and plans have adjusted according to those hearings. So I will leave my testimony at that
since it's getting close to 530. No worries. Thank you. Any questions for Mr. Harris?
Just one briefly. Mr. Harris, you do in fact support the granting of this variance. Is that
right the can you hear me uh the uh board of the society south sorry south street head house
district voted unanimously to uh support this as our indicated in our letter and yes i i do support
it i've worked with mr weiner since 2017 i've been through the building multiple times uh after he
acquired it uh you know to get people out of there to secure the building to deal with the building
and um uh yes and and i did want to point out i'm looking at my notes i did want to differentiate
the difference between a gateway and an anchor building um i think that uh to mr bonnie's point
the this would be an anchor building yes the gateway coming across the pedestrian bridge
is a gateway but when you land and start the corridor downies always served as an anchor
building it it was a gateway and it was also a uh you know an entry way to the corridor and
i would and my board feels the same way about this proposal that um with a restaurant there
it is more of a an anchor building than and you know a literal gateway to the district
thank you any further questions mr anastasio none for me sir may i ask a question please
mr bonnie mr harris would you agree with me that for the middle middle community meeting
hosted by your organization that only a few hours notice was given to qvna and i think
no notice given to society hill civic which is why we held the third meeting mr bonnie um
at QB&A's request. We held the official meeting on August 4th, and there was notice given out to
all the affected neighbors. The September 9th meeting was a standing committee meeting of the
South Street Real Estate Committee, and so where we were going to discuss what took place on August
4th, but it is all of our meetings, our public meetings, and as a result of the low turnout for
september 9th we did agree and and request along with you and along with uh queen village to host
a third meeting um to and and i will say cuban a did a great job of getting notices out and getting
60 people there um but uh it was the same plans as presented on september 9th yes but your but
your answer did begin with a yes is that correct yes my answer is it was a public meeting and uh
anybody could uh attend at any our public meetings okay but by the way i'm problem with the word yes
but okay okay yeah thank you by the way mr harris uh are you not aware that uh my office on behalf
of my client engaged the professional mailing company to invite all uh relevant participants
to each and every community meeting is that right we we start our meetings with a confirmation that
uh the applicant has done the appropriate mailings and uh that uh before we begin the rco meeting
that's standard practice for our organization but that wasn't that wasn't done for the second
meeting because let me clarify that was a standing committee meeting that is open to the public
at which we discussed and anyone can join at which we discussed the matter that was discussed on
august 4th so it did not require a separate mailing it was a standing real estate
forth so it did not require a separate mailing it was a standing real estate committee meeting of
the board but anyone from the public can and did join us but it did not require a separate mailing
but the initial meeting sir and the subsequent meeting the qvna all of that was mailed to 100
to folks is that right um well that's the best of your responsibility but that's my understanding
yes that's correct yep okay thank you okay mr bonnie no more questions thank you uh anyone
else to testify in this case thank you mr harris no more here sir thank you planning commission
those other hands went down yes okay planning commission good evening chair peter bernard
for the planning commission this property is indicated for commercial mixed use in the
comprehensive plan we feel the existing cmx1 zoning is out of date and not reflective of
south street which is predominantly cmx2 2.5 and 3 the current zoning dates 1974 the district
plan was adopted in 2013 this proposal supports redevelopment of the waterfront and south street
while serving as a gateway connection between the two via the south street bridge the revised plans
complement the character of the neighborhood and scale of recent approved development
accordingly the planning commission recommends the board approve the variances
fern are there revised plans we do have revised plans that we sent to attorney how many pages
how many pages uh rich rich uh who's the uh architect can tell you how many of the
actual pages are revised i think rich is here mr villa still available
are these new revised plans or revised plans that we've already seen um mr anastasio did
you send this as a separate email to me and is there a um proviso plans form it's been i did i
I emailed you the revised plans, and then I emailed you the proviso form that's signed by Mr. Villa.
The Z1 and Z2, the two first plans, they're all representing what we discussed today with the revisions that were over the first three meetings.
But the first two sheets were the only sheets that were sent to zoning, so Z1 and Z2 would be the appropriate pages.
So two sheets dated today, Rich, 10-19, is that right?
I don't have them, I'd have to look.
Excuse me, this is Sharon, but I have not reviewed these.
I did not, sorry if I missed them,
but I do like to check the proviso plans form
before it's voted on.
So if you can give me just a minute.
If I make sure that the RCLs have the current plans
that are being voted on yeah i mean uh these were the ones presented at our last meeting but
yes we can make sure that you have them but they're dated today you said no they're not
dated today no they're not dated today the proviso form was stated today could we see
the proviso form i'm not even sure what that is it's a form that it's a proviso one at a time
gentleman mr villa the proviso form i emailed to verne and i believe he emailed it to sharon
um i can't pull it up but uh that just transmits the transmits the drawings is that correct that's
correct but it also lists the three differences between the initial refusal and what was in the
last meeting so that would be the lot coverage the height and density
could i ask that the board hold the vote until next week until we can assure ourselves
we're voting it today we're voting it today thank you excuse me i received them at 12 59 today