However, over time, the site has become vacant, thus opening up the potential for new mixed-use development.
Again, I think, again, this further shows a consistency with the planning thrust in the city.
Second, based on the policies of the city's comprehensive plan, the zoning code specifically states that the recommendations of that plan shall be considered by the commission and zoning board as a factor in making any decision on a zoning permit application on a topic covered by the adopted plan.
So, you know, obviously it's a charge to the board to take into consideration, very serious consideration, the planning policies that have been established.
The variance for use.
This requested variance is to permit residential and limited commercial development in an industrial zone.
And a comparative situation exists just south of the project at 3750 78 Main Street, the Bridge 5 Condominium.
You may be familiar with that.
It's a seven-story building containing 60 dwelling units, zoned ICMX, which is similar to the zoning of the proposed project for 3900 Main Street.
So we have a nice comparative situation here.
Here's a photograph of Bridge 5 Condominium.
just down the street so approval of the use variance in my view would be consistent with
a contemporary evolving land use pattern in this part of main street it would also be consistent
with the land use policies as previously described from the city's comprehensive plan
the lower northwest district plan and the current thrust of the wissahick and gateway planning
to encourage a mixed-use area.
The variance for height.
And I looked at this, and I had a little smile on my face
because height has always been, when I've dealt with zoning issues in the past,
has always been one of those judgment call variables, if you will.
What's too high?
What is too high?
But I'd like to think of it more in the context of scale.
What is the scale that's being proposed?
And does that scale seem to be somewhat compatible with what may be around it?
Or how the land use is changing over time?
So the height requirement to increase the building level, I think,
is a perfectly consistent and reasonable variance
to grant in this situation.
Setback.
Well, setback would, as required
under the existing regulations in the zoning code,
would obviously, and I think Mr. Labor
made this point rather clearly,
would effectively render the site undevelopable.
Let me just interject parenthetically that the zoning requirements and most standard zoning codes, including the city of Philadelphia, are really arbitrary standards.
They developed over time, not based upon any kind of scientific calculation or judgment.
They were just simply numbers that literally were pulled out of the sky.
There's a new effort that's been circulating in planning and design circles over the last several decades.
That's called urban form zoning.
or looking at more traditional approaches to design a site based upon
approaches to design a site based upon specific design parameters, rather than simply applying
mathematical numbers. And I think the setback is a clear example of that.
It's also important, I think, to be aware that any development on this site will be subject to
flooding regardless of the setback requirement so anything that's going to happen here in the future
even if it does comply with the the prescriptions for setback height use etc in the zoning code
they're going to have to be dealing with with flooding and i think the again as i mentioned
earlier and mr labor did point out the the flooding mitigation program or plans really
give an assurance that this site will be developed sensitively and will provide a reasonable
location for people to live so what i conclude is that as a result meeting the arbitrary
mathematical standards of the zoning code for setback usurps creative development and
would perpetuate a hardship for any potential development, whether it's this project or
another project.
Next slide, please.
So in order to address the flooding issue, the applicant has submitted a hardship diagram
that shows, again, the dimensional relationship between the allowable building area, the land
areas within the setback and the floodway and mr labor has already covered that to some degree
next slide please
so my conclusion is that a proposed mixed use development for this site at 3900 main street
could not happen without the request of variances
any development would in all probability face the same challenge
The physical configuration of this narrow rectangular site does have development potential, but it's really going to require design creativity.
I think this proposed project does meet that goal, and I think it would be a socially and economically viable land use for Mania.
Now, Mr. Labour, in giving you some of my credentials, indicate that I'm a professor.
Well, as a professor, I give grades all the time.
How many have I given in the past?
I can't count that high.
If I had to grade this project, I would give it an A.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman and members of the board.
Thank you, Dr. Cohen.
I'd like to move quickly to promote Dr. Peter Angelides as a panelist, please.
He will be giving a very brief economic impact analysis.
Dr. Angelides, please raise your virtual hand for panelist purposes.
Mr. Labor, before we go on, Bridgeview, did I see that's 90 feet?
Yes, yes, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you.
Certainly.
Peter Angelides has been promoted to panelists.
Could you please state your name and spell for the stenographer?
Yes, here I am. My name is Peter Angelides.
Peter, P-E-T-E-R, last name A-N-G-E-L-I-D-E-S.
Do you swear or firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Please proceed, counsel.
Thank you.
Good morning, Dr. Angelides.
In the interest of time, would you please provide a high points overview of your findings
regarding the tax and economic impact of the proposed development at 3900 Main Street?
Certainly I will.
And these are based on the plans as provided, which I think the board has heard today.
The development cost is estimated to be approximately $45 million.
And I have calculated several types of benefits.
The quick overview, I've looked at property taxes, wage taxes, both from the perspective
of the building operating for the next 50 years.
I've also looked at construction benefits
and the benefits of operations of economic activity
going on inside the building
and a broader, what are the benefits
to the broader community?
So property tax, the property tax will come
as from any construction,
a property tax is based on the value of the improvements,
Based on comparable properties, the value, we estimate that the assessed value of the
We estimate that the assessed value of the improvements will be approximately $39 million.
In other words, that's what the assessor will come along and assess it for.
That's the value of the improvements above the current value of the land.
This property is subject to the tax abatement, and it's a new construction tax abatement.
And so it starts in year one at 100% and goes down 10% every year to year 11 after the building opens when there's no more abatement.
In the first year, as you can see on the sheet, and also really year two, the first year of taxes, the property will generate approximately $53,000 in taxes, 24,000 of which will go to the city and 29,000 of which will go to the school district.
excuse me yes uh this is uh commissioner gaston um i'm sorry i can't see this um can we make it a
little larger uh let me see uh member gaston uh bear with me yes that's better and i'm going to
you you can direct me if you want me to be more specific but i'm going to go down to this analysis
here no no it's fine I just couldn't yeah I just couldn't um really thank you there you go and then
you can see at the the very last line um above the above the horizontal uh black line um the
the school district the 240,000 uh and I'm a little bit to your left please um there you go
240,000 is the annual property tax to the uh city 291,000 is the annual property tax to the
school district for a total of about $532,000 in property tax, essentially forever. Once the
abatement rolls off, it'll be more than a half a million dollars of property tax to the city and
school district combined every year. And in the first 11 years, it'll be a total of $2.9 million
of property tax. Now I'm going to turn to the wage tax. So the property tax is from the building
itself, but since it's a multifamily residential building, it will have people living in it,
households living in it, and those households will be earning an income.
And in order to be able to afford the projected rents for the building, they will need to
have in total a little more than $11 million in income collectively in order to be able to afford
the units that they're in. And that the wage tax rate of 3.75%, which you see there, that translates
into a little more than $400,000, $420,000 of wage tax to the city every year. And I think that is a
very conservative estimate because basically we're assuming that everybody buys the most expensive
apartment, rents the most expensive apartment that they can. But in reality, there'll be several
households here who have significantly greater incomes than the rents would imply. So I actually
would expect the wage tax numbers to be greater than that. And those wage tax numbers begin
essentially on day one. As soon as people start moving in, that becomes their home address and
And they pay wage tax to the city on that basis.
In addition, and Adam, if you can pull out just a tiny bit to, I think, the beginning of, or the bottom part of page five.
No, I'm sorry.
I take that back.
Page six, the middle part of page six.
Yeah, that's it.
this refers to sort of the economic activity that gets generated from the building itself,
not from the property tax and not from the tax of the people living there, but from the actual
construction of the property. That's a one-time impact, but it will generate more than 400
full-time equivalent jobs. It'll generate approximately $24.7 million in wages and a total
of $1.4 million in taxes. So that's all economic benefit that comes from the development of the
project. And Adam, if you could pull back just a tiny bit, it's very difficult to see.
the that's good that should be good um and so there you see the the uh total of 67 million
dollars in output generally 407 000 207 um jobs essentially from the construction of the project
jobs, essentially, from the construction of the project. And that includes people working on the
and that includes people working on the project
project itself, but also people who work in the city of Philadelphia who are supplying materials
It's a good thing.
and goods, subcontractors and whatever, but all within the city of Philadelphia, more than 400,
more than 400 full-time equivalent jobs, just from the construction of the project itself.
And then, Adam, if you go to the top of the next page, there's a similar chart that you,
It's at the top of the page you're on right now.
There it is.
And this concerns the annual operations of the building.
So people will be working in the building, both at the front desk, maintenance, and also the folks who are relocating their offices there.
And that, again, is almost $5 billion of output a year, 26 jobs, both in the building and in nearby areas that provide inputs to the workers in the building, and more than a million dollars in wages every year, and a total of $80,000 thereabouts in taxes to the city.
So that that in contrast to my Mr. Cohen, my predecessor, that's an awful lot of numbers.
And I'm going through them very quickly. And they're they're all in the report.
But that some is there are substantial financial benefits to the city and school district from this that I've enumerated.
And then there are moving away from the numbers, other benefits to the community that come from this.
And this building is in the commercial core or near the commercial core of Mani Yonk and also near the Wissahican Transportation Center.
So residents here will go to the businesses in Mani Yonk and support them.
There are 115 units.
That's more than 150, 160 new residents living there and another dozen or so people working in the building.
So we're talking a substantial number of people who can now go to Mani Yonkin, you know, buy cheesesteaks or soda pop or whatever it is that is provided in the neighborhood.
And these folks can now patronize and otherwise they wouldn't be able to because they wouldn't be there.
In addition, the project provides support for the riverfront access or the riverfront trail.
will support the public transit network because it's quite close to train stations and bus stops.
And in addition, overall, pulling the camera way back, this is an increase in housing supply
for the city of Philadelphia in general. It contributes to Mayor Parker's goal of adding
many thousands of new units. And this is a direct way of doing that. And that concludes
my testimony. Thank you, Dr. Angelides. Mr. Chairman and members of the board, I'm just
about finished. A few minutes. I'd like to, you've heard a lot this morning, but I wanted to share
with you the support letter which has been submitted to the board from the immediately
impacted across the street owner of 3901 Main Street, noting that his property is situated
directly across the street and supports the project.
We have support from nearby 3715 Main Street,
noting that the lower Main Street has not experienced
the level of investment and intention as the commercial core
of Mount Young's much-beloved Main Street.
Similar expression of support from the Little Woods
at 4045 Main Street.
And as noted at the start of the hearing,
There is support for the project from minority-owned businesses that would benefit from participation in this amazing project and others who don't not only that support,
but speak to the reputation of working with Michael and the place that he holds in the community for being a good partner.
And finally, there is an expression of a commitment, which is, as you see, signed off on by Ahmed Michael Al-Haddad to a minimum of 20% MBE participation in construction and a minimum of 5% affordability at the subject property based on 60% AMI,
based on 60% AMI, which is not required and just speaks to Michael's commitment and the way that
which is
he seeks to build in communities. Mr. Chairman and members of the board, the authorization of
variance relief will not alter the character of the neighborhood or district or be detrimental
to the public welfare. The proposal fits into the surrounding neighborhood as evidenced by the
district council members' enthusiastic support, in addition to other expressions of support.
This all speaks to the granting of relief being of benefit to the public and within the spirit
of the code. The proposed variance would represent the minimum variance to afford relief and will
represent the least modification possible of the regulations at issue to permit a reasonable use
of a burdened property. I know you're going to hear otherwise on this issue that I've just
mentioned. We took extra time today to provide the data for you and the analysis of the experts
to go to the heart of the refusals and speak to the criteria that this Zoning Board reviews.
The grant of variance relief will not substantially increase congestion in the public streets,