this case five days in advance of this hearing yes thank you please proceed and share your screen
Leonard, do you want to be sworn?
Yes, thank you.
State your name, please, and spell for a court reporter.
Leonard Reuter, L-E-O-N-A-R-D.
Last name is R-E-U-T-E-R.
And I'm senior attorney for the city of Philadelphia.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Proceed, Vern.
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Mr. Chair, I stipulated to the accuracy at the time, August 30th, that my application for a pharmacy at this location would have triggered a referral pursuant to this bill number right here.
However, since then, the bill was vetoed by the mayor, and therefore, there really is no special exception to get this.
If I were to submit something tomorrow, I would get this as a matter of right.
But we're here.
So after speaking to Attorney Emerson and Mr. Reuter, I think it might be best, unless you think otherwise, to just put this on and get through this, knowing that this relief does not need to be granted because it's already as a matter of right.
Does that make sense?
Leonard?
Hi, thank you.
uh first i apologize there's a glare coming off my screen so i look um a bit ghastly right now
but anyway um uh and my office light is behind me so then i would just be in darkness anyway
And my office light is behind me, so then I would just be in darkness. Anyway, yeah, so the bill was vetoed by the mayor, and it was close to the end of the session. The sponsor of the bill actually resigned her position, and council did not subsequently vote to override the veto, and they only had seven days to do that.
The position of the city, though, is that at the time the permit application was given a referral, that was good because pending ordinance doctrine did apply.
So L&I is without a means to just simply issue the permit now because once the referral was issued, it basically boots it out of the system.
But I'm indifferent. If Mr. Anastasia and his client want to just go forward and get it as a variance, it would still be considered a variance, even though the underlying zoning classification hasn't changed.
or you could potentially uh refer it back for uh an amended application um but then that would
take like 20 days i don't know i'm again i why don't we just technically they're still seeking
a variance and that's the only thing before you it's not an appeal against l and i but we do agree
that it's just one of these weird things you know maybe you want to see which way the variance goes
and just uh so why don't why don't we go ahead yeah i mean this is not a variance it's just a
special exception i'm sorry special exception yeah uh which sort of but yeah i i think the
best way to go is just to present we get the relief here hopefully and move move forward
otherwise it'll just be further delayed so uh the application is for a pharmaceutical of
sundries and convenience sales at 1000 cottman avenue this is the property in question
right here. It is zoned CMX2, which, as we just explained in depth, this use is now as a matter
of right. However, at the time, the pending legislation, which was subsequently vetoed,
would require a special exception. My client is a pharmacist. He runs Pharmacy of America.
He started this himself. This is going to be his ninth pharmacy in the area,
all without incident, without any sort of problems or security concerns. He has a
Bulletproof glass, camera surveillance systems.
The systems actually connect with the local police department.
And he's very high regarded and well received in every neighborhood that he's ever been in.
We did meet, in fact, with the community.
By the way, this is some of the exterior shots.
There's a parking lot there.
and then we have some interiors
so you can see
there's a site plan
I want to move
into evidence
interior layout
drawn to scale
we have our deed
as part of our exhibit packet, our proof of posting, our letter that went out to 57 individual
households. It was fairly well attended. I'm going to stop sharing this and I'm going to share
if i can find it there's another
just give me one moment
pearl home community town walks and civic association meeting was held
it says they did not reach agreement on the application but seven folks in attendance
voted to support it another seven voted to support it with provisos those provisos were camera
lighting and eventual fencing of the adjacent parking lot or lot so that there would not be
any sort of folks hanging out there and my client was okay with all of that only one of the 15
And my client was okay with all of that. Only one of the 15 people in attendance voted to oppose.
So I think that's a pretty good indication as to, you know, my client's operation, our presentation.
And because of this is a special exception with any and all plans for safety and security, because my client has a record in the city of Philadelphia, opening up now his ninth pharmacy without any incident ever, 311 or 911.
one and because as of today this use is now considered as a by right use i'm respectfully
requesting the granting of this relief and with that i'd like to have dr sabri ibrahim
raise his hand and be recognized
doctor could you state your name and spell for the court reporter sabri ibrahim s-a-b-r-i-i-b-r-a-h-i-m
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Proceed, counsel.
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Doctor, did you hear my presentation to the board today?
And is it true and accurate to the best of your knowledge?
And do you adopt it as your own testimony?
Questions from the board?
No, Mr. Chairman.
No, Mr. Chairman.
questions or comments from the virtual audience
I see no handshare
planning commission
Ron Bednar city planning
the property is indicated for commercial
mixed use on the city plan
in the physical circumstances of the site
by right use
we recommend that the requested
special exception be granted
MI 2022
005451
1000 Cotman Avenue
I vote yes
Thomas Holliman, my vote is yes.
Ish Belshahi, my vote is yes.
You have your three votes.
Thank you.
Thank you.
We're going to have to do number one now, MI 2022, 002-947, 340 Domino Lane.
I mean, Eileen Quigley is the attorney.
RCO meeting was held 6-14-22.
Confirmed by email by Eileen Quigley.
Ms. Quigley is coming back in as a panelist.
Yes. Good afternoon, Chairman Bergman, members of the board. Eileen Quigley on behalf of
the applicant, Fox Television News Stations. We're here on behalf of 340 Domino Lane.
You've already been sworn. Just a few questions from our vice chair.
Good afternoon, counsel. Do you agree to weigh the reading of the refusal and stipulate
to his accuracy?
I agree to waive the reading of the refusal, but I don't stipulate to its accuracy with regard to the refusal based on Title 14-4014B, the multiple principal buildings on a lot in residential district.
we believe as a legal non-conforming use that we would not be required to come here for a
a variance but because it's in a residential district and it still remains in a residential
district we have been refused on that grounds and that would be my only objection. Okay we'll go
through that as we work our way through the case. Thank you. Have you emailed all have you emailed
all of the required documents are these available to this hearing yes with the exception of um we
provided to miss emerson this afternoon an affidavit of mailing as proof of mailing of
the notice letters uh for the rco meeting that took place before ballard spar and before i and
Ballard Spahr were engaged as counsel to the applicant. There was a meeting on June 14,
2022, and they mailed out the notice letters on June 1. And as I said, we did forward to
Ms. Emerson an executed affidavit of mailing as evidence of that mailing. We would like to add
that to our exhibits when we move them into evidence. In addition, we added additional
In addition, we added additional photos of the surrounding area at our Exhibit D,
photos of the surrounding area at
and we also included a bio for Ruggieri and partners, Philip Ruggieri and Steve Garwood,
who will also be answering questions testifying at today's hearing.
Okay, thank you. Please proceed and share your screen and we can work through the
case. Thank you. Can everybody see the screen? Yes. Great. So we're providing these exhibits
and would like to enter them into evidence at the end of our hearing and we have the necessary
requirements. We have portions of the lease, the tax clearance certificate, photos of the posted
zoning notice and photos of the site and surrounding area in addition to the other
exhibits that we'll get to as we move through the hearing. So just for some context
this site is leased by it's owned by the city of Philadelphia and Fox television stations and its
predecessor entered into a lease with the city of philadelphia in 1966 and that lease has since
been renewed and we have that as part of this exhibit so fox has been here at this site
for over 50 years
so what is happening is they are constructing a garage in order to house
a very well-equipped van that will be for mobile production and newscasts in event of emergencies.
And I will have a few people lined up to answer questions about that,
but I just wanted to give everybody some context as far as where it is,
because in addition to the multiple buildings on the lot there,
They were also refused for the steep slope regulation under 14-704-2B.2.
So this is the station off of Domino Lane.
Here's the existing building.
This is a site of Domino Lane and the other commercial industrial businesses around the area.
this is the site again
i'd like to stop at this one because this pardon me where's the garage going to go so
this is where the garage is going to go it's in the rear of the property okay and
i'll find you a photo that this is another surrounding area um this is part of the area
that they're going to be cutting into a small portion of this steep slope here.
And as I said, this is a good map to really show
the context of what is happening around this area. These are all the properties that we,
there are only eight or nine properties that we had to send notice to and they're all along this
commercial carter on domino street you can see residential is over here and is um far outside
the 250 feet so here's the site and with that i would like to ask um that mark top be elevated as
a panelist mr toppy could you please state your name and spell for the court reporter
yes my name is mark tobe t-o-u-b right spelling of the last name i do you swear or affirm to tell
the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth i do proceed my apologies mr tobe for
mispronouncing your name i'll call you mark if that's okay that's fine so um mark we have here
the the visual where your site is but i'd like you to offer some background in history as far
is the use of the site and as i mentioned fox has had it and at least with the city since 1966 so if
you could just explain what the site is used for how many employees work there yeah sure the um
the site is a is a transmission facility we have a television transmission tower and a transmission
mission building where we house all the equipment for the transmitter for what was is WTXF now
was WTAF and WIBF in its prior ownership on a daily basis we
ownership on a daily basis we have one employee who is permanently assigned out there
and you know at certain times we may have an additional employee who comes out to the site to
assist we want to add a garage to this facility to house this vehicle as part of our disaster
recovery plan and the reason we chose this site was because we we own the van already it's a multi
camera production van that should our facility our studios which are located at
4th and market street in old city should those studios become unusable for some reason
we want to have the van away from that site and close to our transmitter site where we can
you know immediately take action to to get back on the air our concern with the uh the market
street site is we're adjacent to independence national park and there are several uh federal
and governmental buildings in the area including the u.s mint and because of the historic uh nature
of the area and the nearby federal buildings we've we've got a concern that you know that there could
be a terrorist activity or some activity that would make our studios at market street
unusable so is it safe to say that this is a quite a technologically advanced van quite expensive
this is this van is uh in the range of a quarter of a million dollars um it contains like i said
a multi-camera switching system uh communications equipment satellite communications equipment
um all those needed to to cover a news event such a you know a major news event in such a
situation where you know the old city area would be uh not usable
and when having this van and you'd have to have the garage which is really what's happening here
You have to construct a garage back here, and that's to keep it safe from the elements and secure otherwise?
Yeah, we want to have it behind the building and to keep it out of sight, so to speak, and to keep it safe from the elements.
And, Mark, what is the hardship if you are not able to construct this garage to house this vital van?
Well, we would we would then have to probably build a facility where we could do the same type of emergency work and probably on this property as well.
So it would be the same.
We'd have to build another studio is what you're talking about.
Yes, we would.
This is essentially the least modification of the zoning regulations
because you're actually just building a garage, a house, a mobile van
that would do the same as if you had to build another building.
Exactly.
You know, as broadcasters, we are, you know,