Thank you.
Good morning.
My name is Ishmael Shahid, and I will be chairing this morning's Philadelphia Zoning Board of
Adjustments.
With me is Board Member Cheryl Gaston.
Present, Mr. Chairman.
Board Member Tanetta Graham.
Present, Mr. Chairman.
Board Member Michael Johns.
Present, Mr. Chairman.
And Board Member Tai Wim will be joining us shortly.
As also presented here today is our attorney, Hillary Emerson, Ian Haggerty, the executive director of the Zoning Board, and our board administrator, Lakeisha Dandy.
I'll pass it over to Ian to read the preamble.
Thank you, Chair. Good morning, everyone.
Please be advised this meeting is being recorded.
Your participation in this meeting indicates that you consent to be recorded.
the video will be posted on the ZBA website approximately one week following the meeting.
The meeting is being held in person with remote capabilities, meaning that individuals
can participate either in person at the hearing room or remotely over Zoom. When you're recognized
to speak by the board, please state and spell your name for the court reporter and then wait
to be sworn in. If you're in the hearing room with us, you must speak into a microphone so that
everyone in attendance can hear you. If you're participating remotely, please turn on your camera
and unmute yourself when you're recognized to speak. Once you've been sworn in, please state
your name each time before testifying, whether you're in person or remote, so the court reporter
knows who's speaking. Please mute yourself or turn off the microphone when you're not speaking.
If you're participating by phone, press star nine to raise your hand and star six to unmute.
If you're participating by phone, please call 267-270-5548 to register your appearance by the close of the business day after the hearing.
You must provide an email address and the address of the property in which you're interested.
All others can enter their appearance through the Zoom registration.
For individuals participating here in person, there's a QR code available to register your appearance.
for assistance, please see a staff member at the back of the room. If you have any questions about
entering your appearance, please contact RCO's EBA at Philadelphia. In the hearing room, please
refrain from talking or engaging in conversation while the hearings are proceeding. Please note
that eating or drinking in the hearing room is prohibited. In addition, verbal and physical
aggression will not be tolerated. If you're participating remotely, remember that the Q&A
on the Zoom platform is not for testimony or comments. Any concerns related to the hearing
should be directed to ZBA Executive Director at phila.gov. For the folks here in the meeting
room with us in the event of an emergency, please pay attention to the announcements on the loud
speaker, which will include detailed information and instructions. If no announcements heard,
please wait for directions from security officers or ZBA staff members. The main exit is through the
double doors at the rear of the room. If an order is given to evacuate, the nearest stairway is to
the left outside the main exit from this room. Follow the illuminated exit signs to reach the
stairway. If an order is given to evacuate the building, our rally point will be at Love Park
directly across Arch Street from the public entrance to this building. Please remain at
the rally point so we can account for you. And lastly, restrooms are located across from the
elevators and there's a water fountain just outside the double doors to the right. Thank you,
Thank you. We're going to start off with our continuances. MI-2024-0060259192 Frankfort Avenue. This case is being continued to August 20, 2025 at 3 at 930.
Next case is going to be MI-2024-006-086-7777 State Road.
This case is going to be continued to 825 at 930 a.m.
Next case, MI-2024-006-086-0777.
Sorry, Chair, that would be August 20th.
These cases will be continued to August 20th.
2025. August 20th, 2025 at 930. Correction. Next case would be MI-2024-006087 550 West
Willow Road Avenue. This case is also being continued to August 20th, 2025 at 930 a.m.
also this case will have attorney moving party yes so there is no continuing state for the
that case it's just it's being continued attorney moving party will grow i'm going to
read that for the record this case is going to be continued attorney moving party
Next case is MI-2024-006090 2038 Hines Street. This case is also being continued to August 20,
The next case is MI-2024-006-131-4732, North Broad Street.
This case is being continued until August 20, 2025, at 9.30 a.m.
The next case will be MI-2024-006-836-4577 Tycomia Street.
This case will also be continued until August 20th, 2025 at 9.30 a.m.
On to request for continuances is going to be MI-2024-000929, 2450 North 30th Street.
Attorney is Devin Okta.
we're getting a request from the strawberry mansion community concern on uh continuing
this case is devin is devin okta in the virtual audience good morning mr shaheed this is jason
hand i will be your calls for the session um devin okta has been promoted to panelists you'll be
joining shortly good morning council good morning chair please state your name and spell it for the
court reporter. Devin
Uqda. Last name is UQDAH.
Thank you.
Do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing
but the truth? Yes.
Counselor, the...
Excuse me. Excuse me, Mr.
Shahid. Can we see if anyone is here
from Strawberry Mansion Community Concern
to explain why they're requesting a continuance?
Sure. Thank you.
Is anyone
in the virtual audience for
Strawberry Mansion
and Community Concerns.
If Strawberry Mansion Community Concerns
has their hand raised, they will be rejoining us
shortly.
Thank you.
Good morning.
Good morning,
Chairman and Board.
Can you hear me?
We can. Can you please state your name and spell it for the court reporter?
My name is Bonita Cummings,
B as in boy, O-N-I-T-A,
Cummings, C-U-M-M-I-N-G-S.
strawberry mansion community concern you swear to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but
the truth i do please continue miss cummings on uh your request for the continuance
well we uh sent communication regarding uh a continuance and was instructed that that was not
going to be uh granted so we did submit our letter of opposition based on what we believe
to presently be uh what their request which is a uh rooftop deck with pilot house and also uh three
three apartment units which was opposed by the members of the uh in-person meeting um there
There was two refusals.
There were two refusals.
One refusal had no information about a rooftop deck that was dated in February.
Then is what was in the applicant's presentation from a previous date.
What was in the applicant's presentation from a previous date does mention it.
So we weren't really sure what's refusal even, you know, what was being used.
So it was, you know, we were lacking in clarity.
Understood.
We did receive the RCO letter from you yesterday, and we believe we have enough information to move this case forward.
So we'll continue this shortly.
Mr. Chair, can you request if there's anybody else in the virtual audience for the continuance
request?
Is there anyone else in the virtual audience for the continuance request for today's?
I have a handout from Charles Richardson.
I have promoted them to panelists. They will be coming back in shortly.
Good morning.
Good morning, Mr. Chair and Board.
Can you please state your name and spell it for the court reporter?
Certainly. Charles Richardson, R-I-C-H-A-R-D-S-O-N, Office of Councilwoman Cindy Bass, room 508 City Hall.
Good morning, Mr. Richardson. How may we help you?
You got to swear me first.
Yes, do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
I certainly do. I had a question about a continuance for 6067 Old York Road, which is MI 2024-006134.
We were informed by the RCO that the applicant never reached out to them, so no meeting has ever taken place for that property.
Yes, we can recall that case shortly, Mr. Richardson.
Okay, great. Thank you so much.
No problem. Is anyone else out there in the virtual audience?
I do not wait, Mr. Chair. I have a James Ferreira with a hand raised.
I've promoted them, and they will be joining shortly.
Thank you.
Good morning.
Good morning.
Please state your name and spell it for the court reporter.
Mr. Ferrer, if you could please unmute.
hello can you hear me now yes we can hear your name can you state your name and spell it for
the court reporter please my name is james ferrera last name f-e-r-r-e-i-r-a you swear to tell the
truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth i do yes uh are you calling in regards to 60
67 O'York Road? Yes, sir. Correct.
We still have not received any exhibits, and
we believe, is this property inside of your name
or an LLC name? It's under an LLC.
So according to our laws, you have to actually have an attorney,
so you're going to have to, we're going to retain you this
case, and you're going to have to retain yourself an attorney.
okay so it's going to be is it going to be rescheduled yes i'm going to reschedule it now
this case will move to august 20th uh 2025 at 9 30. and mr ferrera what is your role in this case
where are you an expediter architect are you a tenant yeah yeah i'm an expediter i'm the one
that applied for the for the zoning problem okay so you are actually not not the actual applicant
you just filed on behalf of somebody else.
So if the entity that you filed on behalf of
is the owner of the property,
then they're an LLC,
they will absolutely need to hire an attorney.
All right.
If you have any questions about that,
you can contact the office.
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
And also, I'd like to say that we uploaded
the requested documents
in the link provided by email this morning.
i was not aware that i was supposed to provide it before so i made a mistake they need to be
provided five days in advance and there also is an rco meeting requirement with the which
the council member's office um indicated that they had spoken with the rco and that meeting
had not occurred so that is something that needs to happen as well so if you have any questions
So, if you have any questions about those requirements, like I said, you could contact the office, and the staff will be more than happy to walk you through it.
about those requirements like i said you could contact the office and the staff will be
All right.
Is there anyone else out there in the virtual audience for continuances?
Mr. Chair, I do not see any further hands.
Karen will be moving over to the non-exhibits. MI-2024-003973, 201 North 58th Street.
I'll tell you for Curtis, is she in the virtual audience?
Ms. Corsi?
Mr. Chair, I do not see anyone under that name in the virtual audience this morning.
This is the second listing, and this case needs to be withdrawn, so I'm going to read this one out.
MI-2024-003.
Excuse me, Mr. Chair, I'm sorry to interrupt you, but we have a handout from Donald Moore.
Donald Moore?
Please promote Mr. Moore.
Understood.
I'll be coming back in shortly.
Good morning.
How is everyone?
Good morning to each and every one of you.
I raised my hand in reference because I have a question as it relates to this particular location as it impacts us.
So when you said that you would have to read it out and this is our second time appearing, I'm just trying to get an understanding of what what like what does that mean?
Will this be continued or is it something else we need to do on our end as it relates to continuing to protest this particular zoning?
Sure. Mr. Moore, can you please state your name and spell it for the court reporter?
Donald D. Moore
D-O-N-A-L-D
another D
M-O-O-R-E
You swear to tell the truth, the whole truth
and nothing but the truth?
So this case currently
is going to be moved on
and this is the second listing
so we do not have anyone here
to speak on the case
so we're going to withdraw this case
dismiss it
so dismiss it as in the applicant will have to reapply for this case so if there's currently
a business operating in that space um without the proper application processes what what does
that mean let me turn it over sir you would need to contact l and i they enforce the zoning code
okay thank you okay thank you thank you mr moore thank you uh mi-2024-003-973
201 north 58th street this case is being dismissed
my vote is dismissed cheryl gaston my vote is to dismiss
my vote is to dismiss
my vote is to dismiss
my vote is to dismiss
MI-2024
003974
A Street
is Keisha Davis or Michael Smalls
in the audience
Vice Chair
I do not see any hands raised for that
particular matter, and they're not in the virtual audience
from what I've seen.
Thank you.
MI-2024-003975
8th Street, this case.
My vote is to dismiss.
Michael Johns,
my vote is to dismiss.
Cheryl Gaston,
my vote is to dismiss.
Tanita Graham, my vote is to dismiss.
Ty Owen, my vote is to dismiss.
MI-2024-006125, 5434 Arlington Street.
Is Joanne Brown in the virtual audience?
Once again, Vice Chair, I do not see any hands raised for the matter,
and I do not see the person questioned in the virtual audience.
Thank you, Mr. Hands.
MI-2024-006125.
5434 Arlington Street.
My vote is to dismiss.
Excuse me, Mr. Chair.
This was a first listing. I think we should
continue. It must be heard.
That's okay.
That's okay.
Well, the vote
MI-2024-006125
Arlington Street.
My vote is to continue
this case to August 20th,
2025, 930
Mark must be heard.
All right. Moving on to our add-on. Are there any one else in the virtual audience?
All right. So we're going to move on to our add-ons. I'm going to read all of the add-ons
off, and we're going to
announce our votes next
week, and that is going to be
MI-2024-005-928-2353-59
East Hargaard Street,
number two, MI-2024-000989-5153
Waluza Avenue, number three,
MI-2024-004-313-2649-South 18th Street.
Number four, MI-2024-005-996-2506-North 16th Street.
And number five, MI-2024-006-034-1428-West Allegheny Avenue.
These cases will be held until next week and voted on.
and they'll be voted on in the 930 list
starting the 930 list
they'll be voted on in the 930 list next week
moving on to our regular list
number one
MI-2024-000260
4832-40
North 6th Street
Attorney
Henry Clinton.
I'm glad
I have a hand up from Joseph
Vaccaro.
Do I want him to speak?
Mr. Vaccaro?
Good morning.
How are you today?
All right. How are you?
Good. Thank you. Yes. My name is Joseph Vicaro. Please state your name and spell it for the court reporter.
Good morning. Can you hear me now? Yes. Okay. Yes. My name is Joseph Vicaro, attorney for 2649 South 18th Street.
Yes. That's one of the matters that the board has continued for a vote next week.
I'm just raising my hand to inquire, is there a reason for holding the vote next week?
I understand that there was a vote that was supposed to have been held last week, but
there were some Zoom problems, and I believe the previous week, it's my understanding that
there was supposed to have been a vote which got moved to last week.
Mr. Vaccaro, we want to make sure we have the appropriate quorum present for the vote,
so we will not have that quorum until next week.
I understand. So you don't have a quorum at this time? Is that the position of the board?
We do not have the quorum that we need for this particular vote.
I understand. I appreciate your help. Thank you very much.
Thank you.
Henry Clayton, is he in a virtual audience?
I'm Vice Chair. He will be coming back in as a panelist shortly.
Thank you, Mr. Hand.
Yes, Mr. Shahid. Good morning.
Can you state your name and spell it for the court reporter?
Henry Clinton, C-L-I-N-T-O-N.
Do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
This is for the use of a personal vehicle repair and maintenance and an existing structure.
And so, I'm going to turn it over to board member Ms. Grant.
Good morning. Have you emailed all the required documents and exhibit needed to proceed with this case five days prior to this hearing?
Ms. Graham, we did most of them, but I'm representing a tenant.
We had a difficult time getting the lease from the landlord, and we just got that yesterday.
So that has been submitted.
Thank you. And do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal, and do you stipulate to its accuracy?
Okay, thank you. You may proceed to share your screen.
Thank you, Mr. Graham.
Thank you, Ms. Graham.
As you're bringing your presentation up, we did receive.
As you're bringing your presentation up, we did receive the unanimous support from the Logos Civic Association 11 to 0.
Good morning, Mr. Shahid. Is that visible?
All right. Good morning, Mr. Shahid, Mr. Chairman, members of the board.
Henry Clinton on behalf of the lessee, Al Vincent.
He is renting the subject property.
This property is an ICMX zoning district, and we're requesting a personal vehicle repair
and maintenance facility.
Here are my exhibits, A1 through A10, which I ask to be admitted.
The refusal of ICMX zoning district to propose use, personal vehicle repair and maintenance
in an existing structure, which is prohibited in this zoning district.
We do have an RCO letter of unanimous support, as the chairman said.
Photographs of the building.
So this is a building that contains two businesses.
My client's business is in the foreground, and the landlord has a storage area in the background.
This is off Roosevelt Boulevard in the Logan section.
And to my left, where the cursor is, are the homes from the Logan area that were demolished because of bad soil.
Here's the building again to the right-hand side.
Just another view.
So imagine the building cut into on the left-hand side is my client's proposed use.
On the right-hand side is existing storage, and the landlord occupies that space.
A view looking north, this is the entrance to the garage.
Again, a closer view with the door to the office.
Just another view.
The building is really address is 4832 to 4840.
And you can see that there's other automobile maintenance and storage facilities along this part of North 6th Street.
This is the entrance at the other end of the building, 4840.
There's a closer view, inside view of the office and waiting area, as well as some of the car lifts.
as well as some of the car lifts
on the inside of the building.
Then we have a rough plan
indicating the layout on the inside.
This is our application for appeal.
Well, it's not a clearance.
It's an indication that taxes are not yet due
for 2025 by the landlord.
Zoning map, the whole area is ICMX.
This is a lease between the owner, Rod Valley, and my client, Al Vincent.
My client has four employees.
This is a zoning notice, proof of mailing, which you would see in a presentation like this.
So my client has four employees.
His hours of operation are nine to five.
He's only doing personal maintenance and vehicle repair, such as brakes, tune-ups, oil changes.
He has a waste management company that comes by on a regular basis and picks up the oil.
He also has a burner, a furnace that is operated with the waste from the oil.
he's been in in this facility for almost seven months he got a violation he understood it was
okay to have vehicle maintenance in this building he found out from l and i that's not the case so
he's here to make it correct and make it right he has a support of the community
the area is also one where other vehicle maintenance businesses are operated
he's in harmony with the code he's in harmony with the desires of the neighborhood we're not
impacting anyone's light or air or development of adjacent properties and we ask the board to
look kindly upon this application.
If Mr. Vincent, can you unmute yourself and adopt my testimony?
Can we promote Mr. Vincent?
I'm gonna say I've been promoted and they'll be coming back in short.
Sir, can you state your name and spell it for the court recording?
Sir, can you state your name and spell it for the court report?
My name is Albert Vincent.
A-L-B-E-R-T-B-I-N-C-E-N-T.
Thank you. Do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Mr. Vincent, were you on the call when I presented your project?
Yes. And was my testimony concerning your hours of operation, your employees, and your use of the facility true and correct?
And if you had the opportunity to testify, would you adopt my testimony as your own and as true and correct?
Thank you, Mr. Vincent.
All right, thank you.
Any questions from the board?
Yes. Sorry, I have a question for you, Mr. Vincent.
How many vehicles do you plan to surface at a time, and how many bays are there currently in the facility?
You're on mute, Mr. Vincent.
I can answer that partly, Ms. Wynn.
Okay, I'm ready.
Yeah, you can answer as well, Mr. Klessari, either of you.
Mr. Vincent, the question was, how many lifts do you have in the facility?
I think the answer is four.
And then I think, Ms. Wynne, you asked how many cars will he be working on at the same time?
I'm not sure.
Yeah, mostly.
What's your average?
Yeah, four to five cars a day.
Four to five cars.
And then when people are getting services, how long are vehicles typically parked outside the facility?
No more than three hours.
Typically, it's just an oil change or breaks while they're waiting for it or a tune-up.
I have no other questions.
My question is, you're not going to do any body and fender work or spray painting, correct?
No, ma'am.
Thank you.
Any other questions from the board?
Questions from our attorney, Hillary Emerson?
Not at this time, Mr. Chair.
Any questions from the audience?
Any questions from the virtual audience?
Yes, Vice Chair.
Charles Richardson had their hand raised again.
I've allowed them to speak and be promoted.
Mr. Richardson.
Good morning again, Mr. Chair.
Good morning.
Councilwoman, based upon the unanimous support of the Logan Civic Association, the Councilwoman has no opposition to granting the variance.
Thank you, Mr. Richardson.
MI-2024-0002604832-48
Excuse me.
Oh, there was one more.
Planning Commission.
Amy Ward with the Planning Commission.
A-M-Y-B-O-Y-D.
Please state your name and spell it for the record.
Amy Boyd, A-M-Y-B-O-Y-D.
It's where to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
Please continue.
The comprehensive plan recommends no change to the existing ICMX industrial commercial mixed-use zoning at this location.
The appellant has shown that the proposed use of vehicle repair and maintenance would not cause detrimental impacts beyond what would normally be expected.
The Planning Commission recommends that the board grant the requested special exception for personal vehicle repair and maintenance.
Thank you, Ms. Boyd.
MI-2024-0002604832-40, North 6th Street, my vote is yes.
Michael Jones, my vote is yes.
Cheryl Gaston, my vote is yes.
Tanetta Graham, my vote is yes.
Taya Wynn, my vote is yes.
Number two, MI-2024-000792-2333, East Allegheny Avenue.
Joseph Monterosso is the attorney.
Yes, they'll be coming back in as the panel shortly, Vice Chair.
Thank you, Council. Let me thank you, Mr. Hans.
Hi, I'm the owner of 2333 East Allegheny.
My name is John Monterosso, J-O-H-N-M-O-N-T-E-R-O-S-S-O.
J-O-H-N-M-O-N-T-E-R-O-S-S-O.
Thank you.
Do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Mr. Chair, would you like me to read the refusal into the record?
Please.
This application is for use as two-family household living in an existing structure.
Two-family household living is prohibited in the RSA 5 zoning district.
okay uh i just want to pass it over to our board member uh ms graham okay good morning have you
emailed all the card documents and exhibits needed to proceed with this case five days prior to the
hearing yes great and do you agree to waive the reading on the refusal and stipulate to its
accuracy yes okay um you can share your screen and proceed thank you do i have to share my screen
yes hold on i have my uh contractor on there and can you uh get on here and i'm sorry i'm
new with this i i really don't know how this uh works i'm sorry
okay yes they have a individual they will be promoted to panelists and coming back in shortly
sir you're going to start to present the entire case um if you are the property owner um he can
guide you through the presentation but you would have to lead it
so i have to share my screen and then showed it how do i share my screen i'm sorry
we can promote him he can share the screen but you would have to um lead the presentation
All right, sir, you will have to speak.
Your contractor cannot testify before the board on your behalf.
OK, I'm sorry.
Let me let me share my screen.
And all the documents you got to show in order because you are not LLC.
You're allowed to represent yourself.
OK, so you have a hardship here because you bought the building like it is.
And sorry, sir, you're going to have to stop testifying on his behalf.
Thank you.
okay sorry all right let me i'll share my screen i'm sorry sorry for all than everybody else share
um like uh sorry i'm gonna have to do this right sorry would you like us to come back to you a
little bit later and um no i can pull it up right now i mean it's just going to take me a second to
get to it that's all no problem i believe this is everything i need uh some of it anyway if not
please let me know what i else i need to show and i could show it sure um your screen was up okay
here we go hold on i'm sorry a little nervous you're making some errors take your time there
it is there it is so this is the um it's your stamps uh mailing this is the mailing stamps
and this is the uh the notice i believe for the for a meeting i guess for the zoom meeting
oh this is for the rco meeting i'm sorry yep this was held on one of six and then here's the notice
for the refusal um now you need to see pictures and all correct yes we didn't see photos of the
property and exactly what you're trying to do okay um i'm gonna go into my photo
and this is how i bought the property these are from the website pictures i took and this is the
first floor unit this is um the living room this is one of the uh the bedroom this is the other
view from the bedroom this is their kitchen another picture of their kitchen their bathroom
room another angle of the living room another angle of the living room their toilet in their
bathroom and their basement i can show the second floor unit as well here goes the second floor
unit this is the living room more living room pictures living room pictures living room
pictures living room picture this is a bedroom one bedroom all one bedroom this is the hallway
hallway bathroom bathroom the other bed or the toilet and then the last bedroom
Go to your text
The folder's there
Is it a text?
Alright
There we go.
There we go
All right, here we go.
Alright, here we go
I'm sorry
I'm sorry.
So here goes the refusal.
The application for appeal.
And here goes the photos.
Then here goes the RCO meeting.
The association improving it.
Project information form.
Here is my tax
clearance. I'm not sure what this is.
Deed to the property.
Deed and then my
real estate tax transfer certification
and I believe that's it.
Questions from the board?
yes uh okay so uh you're showing these pictures how many uh bedrooms are there per floor um the
first floor is one bedroom and then the second floor is two bedrooms okay and did you say that
you when did you purchase this property i brought it in april of 2022 okay and
And when you purchased it, you're saying that it was as it is being represented to us?
Correct.
Okay. And that was, did you obtain title insurance or did you get a certification from licenses and inspections as to the actual zoning classification for the property and its use?
I'm sorry, can you say that one more time? I'm not sure
The question is, did you get a, there's a certification process that L&I can do
They can issue a certificate where they look at the property and its confirmed use
Did you do that?
No, that's why I'm here
And did you get title insurance when you bought this property?
I did.
And as part of title insurance, they usually look into as well what the actual use of the property is supposed to be.
So did they do that?
I'm not sure.
I inherited it this way.
You know what I mean?
I'm not really sure if they did it or not.
I believe they did.
I'm hoping they did their job. I'm sorry. You know, I'm sorry.
And then my last question is, is there any basement living in terms of these units?
The first floor unit has access to the basement, but there is no living space down there. It's just for storage.
Okay. Thank you.
Yep. Thank you.
Any other questions from the board?
And this is a two, two, two bedroom units. What's the bedroom size, bedroom number?
So the one floor, the first floor is a one-bedroom apartment, and the second bedroom, or the second floor has two bedrooms.
Okay, thank you.
Questions from our attorney, Hillary Emerson?
Not at this time, Mr. Chair.
Any questions from the audience?
Any questions from the virtual audience?
i do not see any hands raised mr vice chair thank you mr ham the planning commission
amy boyd with the planning commission the comprehensive plan recommends no change to
the existing single-family residential rsa 5 zoning at this location there is evidence of
unique physical circumstances of the property due to prior permitted use as a law office
the change to an additional residential unit is more in keeping with the spirit of the zoning code
therefore the planning commission recommends the board grant their
perseverance for two-family household living
thank you mi-2024-000729-2333
east allegheny my vote is yes michael johns my vote is yes
cheryl gaston my vote is yes tenetta graham my vote is yes
Taya Nguyen, my vote is yes.
Number three, MI-2024-000929-2450 North 30th Street.
Devin Okta is the attorney.
Okay, Mr. Vice Chair, they're coming back in as a panelist shortly.
Thank you, Mr. Hand.
Thank you, Mr. Hand.
Thank you.
Good morning, Chair.
Good morning, Counsel.
Please state your name and spell it for the court report.
Devin Uqdah, U-Q-D-A-H.
Do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
You wanted to read this one.
so this right here is for um multifamily household living is prohibited in the rsa5
zoning district uh we did receive a letter from the rco letter um from the rco yesterday
so we will be moving on to our board member ms graham good morning have you emailed all
the required documents and exhibits needed to proceed with this case five days prior
to the hearing um yes however i have additional items that i can submit to the board after today
okay and do you agree to waive the reading of refusal and do you stipulate to its accuracy
yes okay all right thank you and council just add that to the record uh this is for the erection of
any tax structure with the roof deck access by a pilot house um for the mostly used family
So please proceed.
Thank you.
Can you see my screen?
Yes, we can.
Perfect.
Perfect. So this is for a property located at 2550 North 30th Street, the FPA.
I'm just going to go through the presentations and offer some insight into what we have going on.
So at first, the letter of refusal.
The letter of refusal states this is for erection of a multifamily, three-family dwelling property.
This is a vacant property. I'm going to call notice to there is an overlay with a structure.
the roof deck um and the roof deck structure by a pilot house which i think earlier we heard the
rcl mentioned um which i'll get into later in the presentation
here we have just the d to the property
and then now we have some pictures of the the area that the property is located
So, the property is located on 30th Street, the surrounding neighborhood is in North Philly.
Some of the commercial corridors on these streets here, as you see, some of the corners have businesses.
It's another area of view of what the property map looks like.
This here is where the property is located.
It's RSA 5.
You'll see some of the surrounding areas are also RSA 5.
there's some commercial mixed-use buildings as well there's a current status of the current
state of the property the property is a vacant lot um east side has two houses that are both
three-story i also have one of the homeowners of the properties um on the call as well who
is also an agreement with the development but the we plan to build a three-story
building here I mean consistent with what's already there again this is
another area of view of the properties in the area then here we have some again
area view zoomed out a little bit more some RM1s and CMX2s again commercial
mixed use in the area as well and i'll go into the drawings of the property
so again existing the property is um currently just is a vacant lot
um there's two properties that are adjacent to it i'm just going to build in the middle of them
um we're proposing three units two two bedrooms and then one one bedroom
Maintaining a three-story building.
Again, it's a side view of the property.
Just prove that the real estate taxes are paid.
Now I'm going to go into, I guess,
we held a meeting with the RCO.
At the meeting, they did not hold a vote,
but I saw that they sent a letter,
which I was CC'd on and then sent another letter this morning.
So I was just going to bring that up to the board and kind of discuss some of the RCO concerns.
So I was just going to bring that to the board and kind of discuss some of the RCO concerns.
So it's a letter I believe the RCO sent this morning.
And basically, for the most part, the RCO's main issue, which I guess we would be able to cure, is that this property has an overlay.
So here, the property has an overlay.
So there's some trash storage.
They want trash storage, which we would agree to.
No basement living.
They did request two units, but as you saw, the property is actually three stories.
Additionally, they mentioned that they did not want a rooftop.
So on the refusal, there is an overlay on a property that lists that they don't want a roof deck on a property, which the property owners have agreed to not do.
We talked about with the RCO.
try to comply with their wants uh we would maintain a three-story building similar to
the properties that are there um and we would not do any um roof deck of any sort and make
sure that the porches and patios are in compliance with the overlay as well
to curing concerns from the rco um i mean we originally said that they didn't have a vote
an initial email then i guess they're saying now they did have a vote um but nonetheless
we were carrying concerns that they have with the overlay by not by abiding by it
um so this is just i mean the history of the property so i originally took over this case
on a prior attorney um and pretty much this this property um was a pill with an accelerated review
requested and we haven't even really been able to get in front of our rso and it's taken about
two years to get us to this point. Well, a year and a few months. So, at this point,
what we're requesting is that we've allowed the case to be pushed back. We've met with the RCO,
sent out the notices. We're going to comply with the overlay. I even have attached some properties
which I submitted to the RCO, which established similar properties that were approved by the RCO
that are doing similar things to what we're doing, and they're pretty close.
So this is 2334 North 30th Street, 2637 West Somerset Street, all from the same RCO,
2203 North Natrona Street, 315 Cummins Street, and then 2848 North 26th Street.
Similarly, they were built multifamily.
They were properties that were originally RSA 5.
I mentioned it to the RCO as well.
I think in their letter, they referenced that they are aware that other developments have happened that were similar, which we plan to do with a vacant lot and just basically comply with the overlay security concerns that the RCO may have.
And that concludes my presentation.
Thank you, counsel.
Questions from the board.
Sure. So did I hear you correctly that you will abide by the request of the RCOs?
I will abide by the request of the overlay, yes.
Okay. So no, the request, for example, no basement living, maximum two units, and there were a couple other things I thought I heard you said that you would comply with that.
So we're in agreements with complying with the no basement lettering. I guess the issue with the two units on which we mentioned was that they're fine with the property being built three stories, but they're not.
One, two family.
Yeah. Which, I mean, it's kind of like not cost effective to do that way because we're still building three stories regardless.
And how many are there, how many duplexes are on that particular block?
So the top of my head, there's, I'm not sure.
The properties that I showed you, so for example, this would be on the same block, well, something like a block over.
this is a three unit but this one also has a roof deck and a balcony so there i mean there
is multiple not so much on that block within a few blocks they've come through this rco and been
approved um some of them also i guess don't actually comply with the overlay but we're
still approved but we do plan to actually comply with the overlay all right thank you
I have a question. So on the plans that you have, are you showing one unit per floor?
So how it will work is the plans that you do show the RCA. I'm sorry.
yeah so basically it's one unit per floor but there's like steps so a part of another unit
Yeah. So basically it's one unit per floor, but there's like.
may have like the uh may like like stairs or like the living room or something like that so
wait sorry just gonna pass it
looks like it's a basement uh apartment like basement bedroom in a basement in in this picture
that's why did you show this to the rco or did you say we would have no basement living
during the RCO meeting?
I did show it to the RCO
and we will comply with no basement living.
They said no basement living,
but they were fine with if we had,
we built out the basement to have storage
or water heaters or washing machines
and stuff like that.
So how would that change
these plans that you have now?
We would still have three units,
except, and we still had to build out
the bottom unit because it's a vacant lot.
We'd have to build it out
and just leave it as storage.
So like they can have,
technically the first floor unit
could have access to the basement so that means you won't you wouldn't use the egress wells you
would take those out yes um okay so i have a question because you said that you are in agreement
with the three stories but you're currently showing a building that's five floors and four
stories no the building is so the so the currently all of the buildings are three stories and the
building that will be built um would also be three stories your your your plans showed four stories
there are four floors above the ground plane so that the top floor meant the height requirement
but it was it was four stories so the the top floor would have been a roof deck which is not
compliant with the overlay which we were saying we would not do we had mentioned so there's a
bedroom up there though so that's not a roof deck that's a that's a floor that's a half floor right
so this is this is one floor this is one floor so this is not one floor it just has an interior
staircase it it would be considered one floor when it's built it's not going to be four floors
yeah no i i can read but i get what you're trying to say um so one i think are we really trying to
do 7 foot 11 ceilings? I mean, like this, I feel like this is trying really hard to cram a lot of
units into a very small space. And these are not really functional spaces. And to ask, so my
question would be, what's the hardship that requires this? Right. So I guess currently
um it's not they're not small units i mean seven seven foot eleven ceiling is pretty low
i mean standard is nine feet uh you know typically things are eight right like you know when they
drop it's the eight so i mean that is still it's your floor to ceiling heights are tight
so i guess currently the hardship is that this property when i mentioned so our show is a vacant
lot. So some of one of the people at the meeting suggested, well, if you were to build a single
family home, it's currently a vacant lot. And I guess economically, it wouldn't really make much
sense for the owners to build just a single family home at the current property. Yeah, but to go from
a single family home to three units, I guess I'm trying to understand those. Well, we're going from
a vacant light we're going from a vacant lot to three technically council how many how many three
i mean how many three units are on the uh or triplexes on the block
this actual block there's no triplexes there are blocks within of their triplexes on blocks
within the next two blocks which were some of the address i showed got it okay additionally
the property owner who's to the property to the I guess the left or right of this also is in
agreement with the development and is on the call. Any other questions from the board? Yeah
maybe not question but just comment I understand maybe two family but to go from vacant to three
family seems a little stretched. And I'm not hearing
any kind of real
hardship kind of argument being advanced here as to why
it couldn't be two units as opposed to, and
I guess my question then too would be how many other two families
are there on this block? Do we know?
So, like I said, the address that I mentioned
We're not necessarily this exact block, but within a few blocks radius, because this is basically a vacant lot on this block.
um because this is basically a vacant lot on this block so for example this would be 2334
So, for example, this would be 2334.
north 30th street and this is a three-family unit um so i guess this is within a two block
radius of the current property now so i guess they do exist and have been through this rco
um i mean there are three units so it's not like as
yeah, I guess completely unheard of in the area.
All right. Thank you.
Questions from our attorney, Hillary Emerson.
Yes, two things briefly. First, Mr.
Do you have proof of posting for today's hearing?
Because I don't believe you received that.
i can i can submit it uh when i submit we need to see that right now okay now you do you're
aware this is a vacant lot right yes but proof of posting is required regardless of the status of
the lot okay i don't have it in this presentation i have to search through my emails but i can
submit it to you okay well we cannot vote on that and i'll vote on this until we have that
That's fine.
From my understanding, there are no votes going on today anyway, correct?
Well, it definitely has to now.
So, and that was something that was requested of you.
So, in future, please make sure that's with your initial exhibits.
Second, you had, can you go to the site plan?
And then also, if possible, I wanted to bring forward the adjacent properties owner.
Okay, well, just give us one second. So, going to the site plan, you, so this does not show, does not look like it shows a roof deck. Is that correct?
Right. Yeah.
So, you were not, are you not, did you originally propose a roof deck? I heard that mentioned, but I don't see that in any of the.
Yeah, so that's what the original proposal was for, yes.
okay all right so but so was there a different plan submitted to l and i showing a roof deck
because so then we need then there's a revised plans issue here no these are the only plans
that we have when i took over the case these are the plans we presented to the rco these are only
plans okay so had no roof deck and they just they then wanted assurance that there would be no roof
deck basically correct yes all right thank you questions from the audience any questions from
the virtual audience yes i have a hand up from pastor tyrone williams i've allowed them to speak
thank you mr williams please state your name and spell it for the court reporter
Good morning, Tyrone, T-Y-R-O-N-E, Williams, W-I-L-L-I-A-L.
You swear to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.
Please proceed.
I attended the meeting with the coordinating RCO Strawberry Mansion Community Concern.
One of the first questions I asked him in looking at the packet that he had for everyone to view through,
uh was did you we did you know about the overlay and um i was disheartening to know that he had
no idea about the overlay that's number one number two um we gave some suggestions to uh um um the
lawyer uh and and the homeowner that was there about perhaps duplex um and scratching the whole
idea of four units or even three units.
And I left my position
at the meeting that the
CDC will only support this if
it was a duplex.
And that it's just too
many red flags for the overlay
for even considering the
CDC to support it. So I just
want to put that on record that we
are not in support of this project
as it currently stands. Thank you.
Thank you, Pastor. And we did receive
it your uh rco letter stating that as well is anyone else out in the virtual audience
yes jarver i mentioned community concerns i have been loaded them they will be joining shortly
good morning please state your name and spell it for the court reporter
bonita cummings b-o-n-i-t-a c-u-m-m-i-n-g-s can you hear me we do do you swear without the truth
We do. Do you swear to the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
the whole truth and nothing but the truth
Please proceed, Ms. Cummings.
Good morning. I just wanted to also indicate that 2334 North 30th Street was refused by this board.
So although we may have been a coordinating RCO, many of the matters that are trying to do three and four units have been opposed by the community and was supported by the decision made from the zoning board.
And that particular property was one that also was denied.
Right. There was a lot of confusion around drawings and around the refusals because I searched through my documents to find why would we have a refusal that states overlay and then one that has no overlay at all.
So whatever we received initially, which it appears that I was the story management community concern was the coordinating ROCO, maybe from the beginning, there was no overlay. I mean, there was no rooftop and pilot house mentioned, which then comes back in February as a pilot house and roof deck refusal.
So we were initially asking for a continuance because we wanted to have clean documents that indicate exactly what was going on with this property.
So the residents that attended in the meeting were adamantly opposed to definitely three units.
uh the several of the nearest neighbors wanted to replace the block with what was there which
was a single family property where the property is situated it's is is a disharmony to throw
apartment buildings in the middle of blocks so you have this uh density that you're creating
in in the middle of a block where many residents from a property is coming out onto the sidewalk
In terms of what we saw, the layout, we talked about this in the meeting, was the seven-foot ceilings, and the attorney thought that was really great height, and we explained to him that that was relatively low, particularly in considering any basement living.
So the community for that block is interested in maintaining their RSA 5 status with this particular property.
And there is no demonstrated hardship here that it needs to be anything else.
And the way these properties are situated, they are porch properties.
So anything below that porch would definitely be subjected to very low or no natural light or quality airflow.
So there was support for maintaining RSA 5.
There was conversation about the consideration of multifamily, but definitely no three-story, no three units would be acceptable for this block.
Thank you, Ms. Cummins.
And we received everything with inside of the RCO letter as well.
Thank you.
Sorry, Mr. Chair.
I just had one additional question for Mr. Ucta.
can you affirm
that the property was posted for the hearing
you're on mute
okay thank you
I believe we have one more person
with their hand raised
in the virtual audience
Elizabeth Fester Bass
had their hand raised
they will be rejoining shortly
counsel you about to say something
No, this is where Shabazz is the owner of the property next to this property.
I just want to ask Sabrina for it.
Shabazz?
Good morning.
Can you state your name and spell it for the court reporter?
I'm sure they may be having a technical difficulties on their end, because they're unmuted, can't
but can't hear anything going on to the other end
hear anything going on to the other end.
okay let me try to give them a little bit more time
so it seems like they're having some technical difficulties uh council is anything else you
want to say before we move on to the planning commission um yeah so i pretty much just want
say that we spoke to the adjacent property owner and they were in agreement with the property
being built as is as long as we comply with overlay um and we do have their support um
because the property owner will be most affected by the development um and that concludes my part
thank you council planning commission
amy board with the planning commission the comprehensive plan recommends no change to the
RSA 5 residential single-family zoning at this location. The proposed use matches the character
of the majority of the homes on the block face. Planning Commission are aware that there are at
least seven two-family properties on the block face, although the appellant has not shown
that three-family is the least minimum and not an overuse of the property. Additionally,
the appellant has not demonstrated that there are unique physical circumstances or conditions
of the property that prevent it from being used in conformance with the zoning code for roof decks.
The Planning Commission recommends the board grant the requested variance for multifamily with proviso, max two units, but deny the requested variance for roof deck.
Thank you. So we're going to hold this case, counsel, and of course, we're still waiting.
We're going to take this to executive session, but we're going to be waiting for proof of photos for our records as we deliberate.
And we should be able to vote on this next Wednesday at 930.
Thank you.
thank you council
number five
MI-2024-003
Wyoming Avenue
Natequa
Goodwin
is the
pro say
or tenant
okay vice chair
we're joining the panelists
as a panel shortly.
Thank you.
Good morning.
Please state your name and spell it for the court reporter.
This is
Natequa Goodwin, N-A-T-I-K-W-A
last name Goodwin
V-O-O-D-W-I-N
Do you swear to tell the truth,
the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Can you please share your screen?
Hold on a second.
You have to turn your video on. You have to turn your video on before you can present.
All right. Board Member Graham has a few questions.
Mr. Chair, I can read the referral into the record before we do that. This application is
for use as a takeout restaurant on the ground floor level of an existing structure. As one
referral a takeout restaurant requires special exception approval and the cmx2 zoning district
thank you great good morning have you emailed all the required documents and exhibits needed
to proceed with this case five days prior to this hearing um so i'm just a little confused am i
supposed to be preventing presenting or the owners so you as a tenant uh should be presenting some of
this and then if who was the actual applicant i believe it was um it can so
yeah either you yes either you or the owner can present but but only you or the owner can present
so one of you needs to be able to to come on and put on uh and uh explain to the board what
you're requesting today and show your documents okay um i'm sorry if you're driving we asked that
you would pull over? Yeah, I'm pulled over now.
I'm not driving anymore. Thank you.
Is Mr. Pichardo in the audience?
I see it.
Jerry Oroza had their hand raised.
They've been allowed to speak.
Is that the property owner, Ms. Goodwin?
Yes. Okay, thank you.
Okay, they'll be promoted shortly.
Please accept the
invitation to become panelists.
so okay so i guess jerry will do the presenting yes all right so you don't have to share your
screen okay yeah i'll be coming back in mr chair good morning good morning um i'm giselle
I'm Giselle Lozada, and Jerry Arosa is next to me, so I would be speaking on his behalf if I can.
Lozada and Jerry Arroz is next to me, so I will be speaking.
You can't do that.
Well, give me one second.
He can present as the owner of the property.
Okay, because I submitted all the paperwork.
I'm his wife.
I'm sorry.
I submitted all the paperwork.
His English is not, like, the greatest, so.
Well, ma'am, if he needs an interpreter, that's something you have to request in advance from us.
Yeah, I didn't know that.
and family interpret.
Okay, well, he can speak.
I'll just pull up the
I'll share the computer.
You can share the screen, but he needs to speak as the property
owner. Or alternatively,
tenant, she is also
able to speak as well.
She can speak. I just have all the documents
that I submitted
five days prior.
So I'm not sure
if she has those documents.
Ms. Goodwin, would you be able
to speak if the documents
are presented by somebody else?
Why don't we have you do that?
Are you prepared to do that now or
do we need to come back to you?
They can share the screen now and I can
speak over everything.
Let us finish swearing you
in then.
Remember Grant?
Oh, you did swearing, right?
okay so you're good okay the screen is up okay so this here is um we're looking at our lease
that we signed back in july okay you have the lease you need to see the refusal
and tax clearance and some photos.
Can you tell us exactly what you're trying to do?
So basically, the building,
I'm trying to make it a takeout restaurant.
Trying to make it a takeout restaurant now.
It's done for just cold storage.
so i'm trying to be able to be able to cook hot food on the stove on the oven um and sell
plan on having a hood range in the building say that one more time do you plan on having
a hood range in the building for a commercial kitchen yes okay um so we do see your rco letter
from the 13th Ward, do you have
additional photos of the actual property
and the area in which you plan on working it?
So this is the outside
of the property here.
this is from the front end of the outside of the property
it has two entrances another side view
this is the inside of the property like the kitchen area
this is the front area of the property before you get to the kitchen where the
customers would be and um so can you go back to that other photo i see the prep station but we
don't see okay you got a prep station wash the washing station yeah you have a hood
oh sorry
this is another angle of the kitchen
This is going to be all takeout, correct?
Can you see some of the pictures of the front
where folks are going to come in
and place their orders?
look up Zillow?
And we have more pictures there.
We need to see the photos
that you presented five days in advance of this hearing okay yeah i have more pictures that you
sent me um so you can you share your phone so they can see it uh
Can you share your phone
so they can see it?
Not sure how I would do that
because I'm not on my computer.
The pictures you just sent over.
Let's finish going through.
I didn't see the appeal
the refusal.
So if you can show us both of those
before you show the photos
in this one because we're going to pull
her down from a
So here
This was the support for
Purviso
And this was the referral
Excuse me ma'am you cannot be testifying
I'm sorry
Yes okay
Okay, so this is the referral right here, and if you scroll down, this is the RCO letter
of support.
Okay, now you want to come down as a panelist so we can promote Ms. McTigla for the additional
photos?
Yeah, I'll have to forward them to my computer.
It'll take two seconds, though.
Let me just eardrop them really quickly.
Okay, special exception.
All right.
okay questions from the board
yes um the at your rco meeting did the rco uh proviso hours operation that you agreed to
9 a.m. to 8 p.m. Wednesday to Saturday?
Ms. Nuteke, what question is for you?
Can you hear me? I just got logged off for about a few minutes. I'm sorry.
Can you repeat that, please?
Yes, the RCO asks for hours of operation to be Wednesday to Saturday, 9 a.m. to 8 p.m.
Did you agree with those terms?
I'm having so much trouble with my Wi-Fi, but if I heard you correctly, you asked for my hours of operation?
Yes. Okay. The hours of operation are Tuesday to Saturday, 9 a.m., no later than 8 p.m.
Any other questions from the board?
yes um what type of food are we talking about here and will any of it require um some kind of
um cooking like fryers and things like that um all american style stuff burgers wings fish and
fries so um a fryer would be required for fries and um fish of course and the wings
and uh how are we doing the venting from this facility so we have a fan in the hood above
the uh oven station and the fire okay so the venting is already existing is that what you're
saying yes uh-huh yes there's an exhaust fan and is it venting through the roof do you know
when you say through the roof
it's coming out
like the fin
is out
to the side of the building
yeah all right okay
thank you no problem
yeah I have one
more question for you about
so deliveries
and trash
what is your plan
what is your plan to manage that at the property so we've already had um discussed this with the
to manage that at the property
Thank you.
community and that was one of those issues as well the trash in the neighborhood so um once we had
finished that meeting um i had uh i have a um contract with waste management so we already
have a dumpster in the back that's just waiting ready to go um and what would you say waste and
what else i said trash and deliveries um as far as deliveries from my business you mean correct
um deliveries isn't something i plan to offer no not for them to have deliveries for you
deliveries so that you can bring in the materials you need to cook okay yeah that's why i was
confused about your question um so like i said there are two entrances in the place um the back
entrance we plan to use that for um majority of our stuff coming in and out um the french
entrance would be specifically for customers um the dumpster is in we have a back space like a back
small um i guess yard you would say that waste management waste management found was perfect to
fit the dumpster back there so yeah we like i said we have two entrances so the plan is to use the
back door for everything
needed. And the back
door fronts on
to a sidewalk or to the
alleyway? The back
door still goes to the sidewalk.
To the sidewalk, okay. Yes.
Any other questions
from the board?
Questions from our attorney, Hillary
Emerson? Not at this
time, Mr. Chair. Any questions
from the audience?
Any questions from the virtual audience?
I see no hands at this time, Vice Chair.
Thank you.
Planning Commission.
Amy Boyd with the Planning Commission.
The comprehensive plan recommends no change to the CMX2 commercial mixed-use voting at this location.
The appellant has shown that the proposed takeout will have no detrimental impacts to the neighborhood beyond what might be reasonably expected.
The Planning Commission recommends that the board grant the proposed special exception for a takeout restaurant.
Thank you.
mi-2024-003974 1525 west wyoming avenue my vote is yes michael johnson my vote is yes
cheryl gaston my vote is yes tenetta graham my vote is yes hiya win my vote is yes
number eight mi-2024-006075 1222 north 29th street phillis smoker as the attorney
on this case, please promote Mr. Smoker. This property is for the expansion of the use of
personal care services and body art to the second floor with single family household living on the
third floor and in the existing attached structure. Yes, I'm here.
Sorry. Counselor, can you please state your name and spell it for the court reporter?
Yes, Philip Smoker, P-H-I-L-I-P-S-M-O-K-E-R, P-A-I-D-3-0-7-0-6-7.
Do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
I do, and I also have my client, who is the owner of the property, or at least the managing partner of the company that owns the property, Courtney Long.
Can he be added as well?
He's there. We'll promote him when you need to sign him on.
And the referral was a special exception approval for the CMX-2 zoning district.
We do have a letter of support from the Beurytown-Charlesbury Community Civic Association, as well as a non-opposition letter from Councilman Young.
Board Member Graham has a few questions to ask you.
Good morning.
Have you emailed all the required documents and exhibits needed to proceed with this case five days prior to this hearing?
I have.
I think I emailed the meeting summary less than five days prior, but that's only because I only received it then.
So, but you have that as well.
Okay, thank you.
And do you agree to waive the reading of refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
All right, thank you.
Okay, this is essentially a, this is a property in the Brewery Town section.
It's on 29th Street, just north of Girard Avenue.
It's a corner property with 29th Street and Stiles, which is a side street.
Several years ago, my client came before the board to get permission to have a tattoo shop on the first floor.
have a tattoo shop on the first floor he got permission to do that and that's been going
He got permission to do that.
very well so he wants to expand his body art services and tattooing up to the second floor
and the third floor would just be kind of storage or office space
previously my client had been living at the property but he doesn't live there anymore he
still lives in the neighborhood and he still works at the tattoo shop and again what we're
doing here today is trying to get permission to move expand the tattooing up into the second floor
um if if you don't mind can i bring him on and i'll just kind of ask him questions about the
exhibits i'm presenting is that okay or do you want me to just go through it sure i mean you
can go through it or you can bring him on i'd prefer to bring him on sure so he's in the he's
in the virtual audience. He's already promoted. I'm here. Thank you. Please state your name and
spell it for the court report. My name is Courtney Long, C-O-U-R-T-E-N-A-Y. Last name's Long, L-O-N-G.
Do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? I do.
Counsel, please proceed. Sure. Mr. Long,
CAD Industries Incorporated or CAD Industries LLC is the owner of the property. How are you
affiliated with that company? I'm a partner of the company. Okay. So is it a two-member company?
It's a two-member company, correct. And you're the managing partner, correct? I am the managing
partner, correct. Okay. And there is currently a tattoo parlor in the first floor, right? And
who manages that? I'm the manager and owner of the tattoo studio on the first floor. Okay. And are
you there pretty much every day? Yes. And you have been for years, correct?
Yes. Every day for years. But yes. OK, well, sure. And do you live in the neighborhood as well?
I do. Two years ago, I did live in in the building for a couple of years and then I bought a property in 19121, just a few blocks up.
It's at 2838 West Glenwood Avenue. OK, I'm going to go through this very quickly and I'm going to interject with some questions for you.
Exhibit A here is the, and tell me if, Board, if you can't see what I'm sharing, just please let me know.
Exhibit A here is the refusal.
Exhibit B is the application for appeal.
Exhibit C is the project information form.
Exhibit D is the deed to the property.
Exhibit E is the tax compliance, it proves that CAD Industries LLC is tax compliant.
And here are the drawings, exterior and interior drawings.
I'm going to go more into what it looks like when I present the pictures, but panel, if
you have more questions about the drawings, please ask.
um uh and mr long did you post this notice yes it's been posted for it's whatever number of
days it needs to be well this is time stamped january yes the photos are times okay so on
january 29th you put those the notices of this hearing there in with the white pieces of paper
on on the side there correct correct and they're still up and they're still up okay
and is that another picture of that
yes yeah sorry i can't see it i'm mc just from behind them phil okay
you're not sharing your screen oh i'm not do you not see my screen yes we see the screen
Okay. All right. Well, Court, I'll just tell you what I'm looking at.
I can see.
So now I'm going to go through pictures of the property in court. Mr. Long, I want you to kind of go through. If you can't see your screen, you can just give me, take a look at what I just sent you about an hour ago. Okay?
Okay. So I'll refer you to the first page of Exhibit H, which is Photos of the Property Building Front. What is that?
It is the front of the tattoo shop.
Okay. And that little door on the corner, is that where people enter?
Yes, that's where people enter. Correct.
okay and then i'm going to the second page and that is the building rear is that is that the
building rear yes that is the building rear okay and then
yes that is the building room okay and then i have a picture of the third page is the first
floor existing tattoo stations um can you very briefly just tell us what we're looking at
yeah so uh the first floor existing tattoo stations that's the second room uh on the
first floor here there are three uh tattoo stations there where we currently operate
um i in the future would like to bring that down to uh to two tattoo stations instead of three
uh really the whole the whole gist of kind of all this expansion is really to give us a little bit
more space to operate so we're not all confined into small areas uh so that is what uh i think
It's exhibit page 33 says first floor existing tattoo stations and as well as the next one, too.
It's 34. First floor lobby would be next.
And that's the whole front area of the tattoo shop.
And it's currently a lobby. We can prep all of our for our clients here.
and that will give us access to uh the second floor from the first floor lobby
uh here's another picture of the first floor lobby
and then you have a first floor bathroom yes first floor bathroom correct and then we move up to the
second floor you have a second floor bathroom as well yes so there's a bathroom on the second floor
and there are three individual what were bedrooms that will be converted into individual studio
spaces to operate okay so i'm looking now at the second floor rear room yes that's the second floor
rear room correct that would be one station uh one tattoo station there correct okay and then
this is another angle from the second floor rear room and now i'm looking at the second floor
front room yes that'd be one other uh one other tattoo station there one person operating in there
yep okay and then i'm going to the second floor middle room yep and again uh that would be the
third uh operating station okay now moving down to the second floor hallway not much to note there
right and then and then the third floor is the top floor right this is like a traditional corner
three-story house basically correct correct so then the third floor uh where am i at here so
let's say second floor okay no so so here we have sorry yes sorry third floor front room
will be essentially office space storage space yes okay third floor uh second now now i'm at
third floor front room still uh now we have like a third floor kitchen kitchen yes so the kitchen
is existing and we'll stay that will be essentially our our break room between uh that and uh
and then you have to actually go to third floor rear room will be essentially our the extension
of kitchen break room okay and then there's a third floor middle room as well correct uh there
is it's like a really small and that would be again like an office like an office storage space
uh more that it's more so that would be office okay and i have a third floor break room yeah
room okay third floor hallway third second floor hall and stairs and then basement what do you can
you say anything about the basement uh storage um and that's exact that's where we do uh our
cleaning right now um and so that's in the uh you can see that it says basement cleaning room uh so
that's in use as well right now okay and will continue to be okay and now this is just a map
I mean, where is it? It's at like 29th and Stiles.
29th and Stiles, corner property. Correct.
Okay. So in the last exhibit is exhibit I, that's the RCO meeting summary.
I mean, we had a meeting on this about a month ago, correct? With the, with the RCO?
Correct.
And there was, and this, this shows 12 support, no opposition.
And I guess one from the zoning committee abstained.
um so you you've had no opposition to this and you've sent out all notices and you've spoken
with people about this application and everything and you had no no opposition that you know of
correct yeah okay um the uh let me interject real quick uh the waste we have um
The, let me interject real quick, the waste, we have regulated waste by a private company as needed. That will not change. And as far as parking, it will remain the same.
There's very easy access to both bus lines, the trolley. A lot of our clientele is in the neighborhood. So parking will not be an issue either.
Okay. Thanks, Court. Do you have anything else to say?
I don't believe so.
So, counsel, the RCO letter states that there will be usage for the business on the third floor, although the application only speaks for the first and second floor.
Yeah. So, we're not – I don't – where are you seeing that, Chairman?
So, Mr. Smoker, so on the refusal and on the application that was submitted to L&I, it says the use is expanding from the first floor to the second floor and the third floor is to remain single family household living.
However, what you're now proposing is to use the third floor instead of a dwelling unit as additional space for the personal services use.
That's correct. I had thought that I had sent in something to the ZBA explaining that change. I had misstated on the initial application. So the refusal states that, but on the appeal, it states that, in fact, it's not going to be a living space up on the third floor.
it's on the appeal okay so i i understand that i did see that in the application for appeal and i
did see that's what you discussed with the rco however the refusal will need to be amended to
reflect what is actually being requested so we can finish this hearing today but the board will
not be able to vote until you have requested and then received an amended refusal that accurately
has the use on it and okay it's being expanded to okay i just want to make sure that and i'm sorry
that it would take up your time like this but i want to make so so i'm amending the refusal
yes you need to amend the refusal indicating the use is expanding to the second and third floors
okay right now it says second floor with single family above sure but i don't think we need
permission to use the third floor as like office and storage space it's accessory to your business
okay i got you okay that's i think that's kind of why i but it's not single it's not single
family household living it's not a unit where someone's living so that is not it should not be
noted as such okay consider camp common area space because it's going to be a breakable area
up there okay okay so i'm i'm amending the refusal sending that in on the eclipse system i guess is
that correct and then please contact me for sure i know how can i contact you sorry you can just
you can reach out to me via email i believe you have my email okay
all right so mr smoker uh i believe we have your presentation can you um
get your client to uh attest to it yes uh mr long do do you any kind anything that i said do you
adopt it as your testimony? Yes, I do. And is it true and accurate? Yes, it is. Okay. All right.
Thank you. Questions from the board? Yes. So I have a question. With the expansion to the second
floor, is the assumption that this is going to allow you to expand the business and take on
more clients? Or is this just giving more breathing room for the existing artists that are already on
site and therefore you'd have the same number of people getting serviced it's on average hate to
say it but it's kind of the same number of people getting serviced um but i it's just so it's just
too it's so uh compact with so many people in a small area um it's i can physically do it here
but it's just it's not comfortable for the scenario of people being around one another
you know disrobed it's not a private space would be help everyone out that i understand i was just
more so wondering impact in terms of are we now going to see an increase of people in the space
when we're sort of discussing use um and then my second question is does the expansion to the
second floor um does that change anything with regulations as it relates to sort of the uh
management of like biomaterials that you already have under contract it's all it's all the same
yeah okay any questions any other questions from the board questions from our
Thank you. Any other questions from the board?
Questions from our attorney, Hillary Emerson?
Not at this time, Mr. Chair.
Thank you. Any questions from the audience?
Any questions from the virtual audience?
Vice Chair, I do not see any hands raised.
Thank you, Mr. Hamm, Planning Commission.
Amy Boyd with the Planning Commission.
The comprehensive plan recommends a change in zoning at this location
from CMX II Commercial Mixed Use to RSA 5 Residential Single Family.
The appellant has shown that the proposed body services
will have no detrimental impacts to the neighborhood
beyond what might be reasonably expected.
Planning Commission recommends that the board grant
the proposed special exception for body art services.
This case will be closed outside of receiving the amended refusal,
and we'll vote on it upon receiving that.
um thanks thanks thanks for can can i get just a little bit of a kind of a timeline when that
when that vote would be you think sorry it's predicted off the year we need to first receive
the amended refusal and then i would say within some within the next 30 days between okay okay
All right.
Thank you.
All right.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Number 13, MI-2024-006129, 7312-7316, Castor Avenue, Attorney Jermaine Harris.
This is a useful office and business and professional on the second floor of an existing structure,
The use refusal of office and professional is prohibited in the CMX-1 zoning district.
We have received a letter of unanimous support from the Ron Hurst Civic Association.
Is Mr. Harris available?
I'm here. I've been promoted. Good morning.
Good morning. Please state your name and spell it for the court report, please.
Sure. Jermaine Harris, J-E-R-M-A-I-N-E, and I am the attorney for the property owner, Caster Complex, LLC.
Do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
All right. Our board member, Graham, has a few questions for you.
Hi. Have you emailed all the required documents and exhibits needed to proceed with this case five days prior to this hearing?
I have.
And do you agree to waive the reading number of refusal and do you stipulate to its accuracy?
Thank you.
You may proceed.
Okay, so this is regarding the property at 7312 through 24, 7312 through 16, Castor Avenue.
and so what my client is seeking to do is have use of the second floor which is what i'm pointing
out right here as offices uh for business offices for their entity 7312-16 caster avenue
uh casper complex uh llc on the bottom of this they have a restaurant bar uh there they own a
bar there uh and this is only this is a commercial district it's only commercial uh on this block
it's only businesses and there's a police station on this block so again this is the
this is the front of it right here and what we're talking about
is this right here when I'm moving the cursor over
so let's get two other pictures here
let's see here
so what we have
let's move this up
we look at the this is the front door and then this is the steps because all
we're talking about is steps this is the steps leading up from the restaurant
leading up to the second floor offices and it's a total of four offices
the second floor offices and it's a total of four offices and uh these are the offices right here
this is how it's been since they uh well they put some paint on it but this is the layout
of what it's been since uh they since this property was purchased back in 20 let's see
back in 2023 actually and so this is a storage room this is continue to storage
continue to storage this is a conference room
another angle of the conference room
this is storage right here this is another office
this is the third office this is the bathroom this is storage
and this is the last office and this is another angle of the big of the uh conference room now
this is the rear of the building which has uh which has parking an abundance of parking
it's the same these are just the black and white pictures uh but this is the black and white this
was of the posting of the zoning notice right here zoning hearing notice
uh let me pull up the plans
So these are the plans of the second floor only, which shows the steps that we were taught that I presented.
Then you have the hallway going into Office 1, going to Office 2, going into Office 3, and then going into Office 4.
And then we have the tax clearance, we have the deed and which evidence is
august 2023 august 7th 2023
we have the notice of refusal cmx1 uh office space second floor of an existing structure
that was the refusal is in a again cmx1 uh it's the application for the appeal
So, PIF, then we have just a list of what's going on around in that particular, on that particular block.
We have basic property histories of just commercial use, most of which are restaurants, which is in line with the first floor of this particular building that they own.
7308, 7312, all restaurants, food, 7320, 7322 food, cafe, 7326, and on the same, let's see, 7328 food.
and then we have the letter of support uh for this particular for this proposed use so
i have on here i have representative uh tatyana morero uh who can adopt my testimony
of this uh presentation if you would allow her if she would
of this uh presentation if you would allow her if she would be allowed to be promoted
sure can we promote it has already been done she'll be rejoining shortly okay
good morning can you please state your name and spell it for the court reporter
yep um first name is tainara t-a-y-n-a-r-a last name is morrow m-o-u-r-a-o you swear to tell the
truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth yes please proceed counsel okay uh miss morrow did
you hear the testimony that just gave uh for the board yes yes i did and do you agree uh with the
testimony that I've just presented? Yes, yes, I do. You don't necessarily have to. Is there
anything you want to add to what I just presented to the board or no? I mean, just so everyone has
an idea, just like Mr. Jermaine has said, it's mostly restaurants and grocery stores at the
bottom so our office space um we're here from nine to five so we wouldn't really be you know
annoying anyone so um but everything else that mr harris has said is true and by the way how
much parking is in the back i mean i presented how much so how many spaces is it um the maximum
capacity if i am not wrong is about 60 from um the whole parking lot but where we have it right
there for our cars um is 20 and we only have 10 active members in our office right now okay all
right uh i don't have any further questions but the board may ask questions but i don't have any
for the questions. Okay, not an issue.
Questions from the board?
Questions from our attorney,
Hillary Emerson? Not at this
time, Mr. Chair. Questions from
the audience? Any
questions from the virtual audience?
I do not see any hands,
Pastor Chair. Planning commission.
amy boyd with the planning commission upon the adoption of central northeast districts
plan the property was zoned commercial mixed use cmx2 the plan recommended to maintain this
designation the proposed use would be allowed under cmx2 designation the planning commission
recommends that the board grant the requested variance for business and professional offices
thank you uh mi-2024-006128 7312 to 7316 castor avenue my vote is yes michael johns my vote is
yes cheryl gaston my vote is yes tanetta graham my vote is yes tyo in my vote is yes
Number 16, MI-2024-006164, 2909 West Gerrard Avenue, Attorney Harry Cook.
This use is for visitor accommodation in an existing structure.
A visitor accommodation is prohibited in the RM1 zoning district.
We did receive a letter of non-opposition from the Burrytown Shardswood Communities Civic Association.
Vote was 13 to 9.
Mr. Cook.
Good morning, Mr. Chair, members of the board.
Harry Cook on behalf of applicant Gregory George.
Please state, can you spell it for the court reporter as well?
Harry Cook, H-A-R-R-Y-C-O-O-K.
Thank you.
Do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
I do, sir.
Thank you.
Our board member, Ms. Graham, has a few questions to ask.
Good morning.
Have you emailed all the required documents and exhibits needed to proceed with this case five days prior to this hearing?
Yes, ma'am.
With the exception, we updated with the letter of support, I believe, yesterday.
Okay, thank you.
And do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Thank you. You may proceed.
Thank you so much.
Can everyone see my screen?
Yes. Okay, wonderful. So we're here today for 2909 West Girard Avenue. I have two folk with me, one, the owner, Gregory George, and also his newly designated property manager, Anthony Lolio, who has an expertise in managing short-term rental properties.
Okay, wonderful. So we're here today for 2909.
Before I go into the meat of the presentation, Mr. George has had this property for about eight years. He's lived in both units. He's had a legal limited lodging license permit for the units.
And in advance and previous to the law change, he was doing short-term rental legally as well, always within the bounds of the requirements.
He is now looking to, as the refusal states, visitor accommodations within an existing structure for the two units.
It is in the RM1 zoning district.
There are two pre-existing legal units.
One unit is on the first floor with expansive use of a finished basement.
That is a two-bedroom unit.
There is no bedroom in the basement.
The other unit spans the third and fourth floor, which, including the basement, is a fourth floor.
but for architectural purposes it's second and third floor and that is a three-bedroom unit with
with a deck the first floor unit has rear access to the yard and here in the appeal
in my binder presentation just going to go through some housekeeping
matters here's the application for appeal
here are the plans that we can return to but again we aren't planning any changes this is a
long-standing two-unit residential and just wanting to expand from the limited lodging
to the visitor accommodation
here are some pictures we also have access to some new photos from the airbnb listing that kind of
show it in its present state and how well maintained it is for rental. We do also want
the option to be able to have long-term rental. And the idea here is in this, excuse me, I'm
getting over a chest cold if my voice gives out. In this area, there is limited options for families
to come and stay and be comfortable, visiting nurses, things of that nature, people with
those sort of jobs and interests, be able to stay comfortably as a family.
As we get to the RCO notification, we'll walk through the photos later.
um this was the rco meeting notice it was sent on february 4th we met with bird brewery town
sharswood community civic association on february 20th via um zoom and it was well attended meeting
we'll get into some of the concerns that were brought up in their letter of support for a
three-year variance and here is the list of addresses provided to us by the Planning
Commission for that notice to go out.
Here is our certificate of mailing to 176 addresses dated the 7th of February.
Here is the zoning notice for the prior, I'm sorry, for this meeting.
And here it is posted.
It was posted 30 days in advance of this hearing.
It is still posted.
Here is the prior zoning permit for limited lodging.
And again, my client's no longer living at the property, and that's kind of necessitated this change.
Here is his tax clearance.
Here is his warranty deed for the property.
Here's just an overview of where it sits on Gerard Avenue.
Here's the zoning overlay, it's RM1 adjacent to CMX 2.5 and RSA5 across the street.
There's the zoning overlay, it's RM1 adjacent to CMX.
This is a petition signed by about 30 residents of the 2900 block of West Gerard in support of this variance.
Here is the letter from Barry Sharswood. No one in attendance had anything negative to say about
Mr. George and his management practices. The general concerns were related to
just the influx, the broader issues related to short-term rental,
related to housing, affordable housing,
potentially the property being sold to an owner
who may not manage it at the same level of oversight
as Mr. George,
and making sure that there's no instances
of disruptive behavior from short-term renters.
There have been no issues to date
over the several years he is engaged in short-term rental.
Um, ultimately the board, uh, did vote, uh, as no opposition for provides it with a proviso
of temporary for three years.
Of course, we would like it to be permanent, but understand the board's, uh, current position
on these issues.
Um, with that, uh, I'd like to, um, elevate my client, uh, to the panel.
because with the recent letter on the 23rd and today's date he does have some additional
information to share regarding some of the protocols he has in place regarding house
rules etc to mitigate against some of the issues that were raised as well as we'll call on Anthony
Lullio, who will be managing the property, who can go into some of the safeguards and protocols
he has in place to make sure those negative impacts don't manifest themselves at this
property. So thank you. If the board has any questions in advance of that, please let me know.
And I'm just going to take a sip of water.
I cannot hear the board.
No, we're listening to your presentation.
Oh, okay.
Are there any questions before Mr. George is elevated to panel?
Let's get Mr. George.
Yes, I'm here.
Your testimony.
Mr. George, good.
Can he say his name and spell it for the court reporter?
Let's get him sworn in.
yes distinguished chair and board and council uh gregory george g-r-e-g-o-r-y g-e-o-r-g-e
do you swear to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth
yes i do please proceed counsel thank you good morning mr george uh did you hear my presentation
to the board today i did was it true and accurate to the best of your knowledge and understanding
Yes. Can I clarify?
You absolutely can clarify.
If there's any additional items you want to share for clarification purposes, please do so now.
Yeah, just briefly, one point, the management, Mr. Lolio and I are in conversation and consideration,
But currently I am self-managing, which with the community, I've lived there for eight years and I'm in touch quite a bit.
And then, yes, I had the limited lodging and I'm, you know, correcting that to go for the variance.
And I've been doing short midterm rentals over the last year or so.
And then, yes, I am renting both properties with even some of the flexibilities, the two bedroom downstairs with the basement.
When I lived there, I had a bedroom downstairs, but want to move forward, you know, the best way possible.
With no bedroom in the basement.
And you recently saw the letter from Brewery Shardswood regarding their support and some of the issues that they raised regarding, you know, unruly folk, et cetera.
And you want to share with the board your house rules?
Yes, indeed. And thank you, Mr. Cook.
um and thank you mr cook uh so um i can share the actual view of my house rules if you could just
you could just read them into the record i think would be fine if that's okay with the chair
sure sure um and i'll go through quickly for the interest of time um so pets uh smoking both uh
Not allowed for the sake of my property.
And then I have here as one of the official on Airbnb, although there are other platforms, that events are not allowed.
Essentially no parties and living in the property.
I don't want it to be a party house.
No commercial photography allowed.
We have quiet hours listed as enforced on Airbnb specifically, but this carries through on all of my leases, 10 p.m. to 7 a.m.
Quiet hours as not to disturb neighbors.
There are extensive additional rules.
I will say up front that this is essentially a hard policy for me, that anyone making an inquiry must read through to the end.
Where at the end, it says, if you have read it thus far, thank you for being a super guest.
Please reply back with a quote, enjoy charming, so I know that the house rules have been reviewed.
So essentially, it's a safeguard.
Sometimes it causes some back and forth when someone wants to stay at my property.
But I hold to someone has to read all the rules.
And without me sort of giving them the cheat, they have to have read it to the detail that they are acknowledging those house rules.
Those house rules include everything that I mentioned before, a limit on the total number of guests, restating the quiet hours, also violation fees or penalties.
It has points about parking that is essentially street parking.
There's points about security cameras as well as trash is in there as well to comply with city regulations.
Where would the trash be stored at?
Yeah, so there are, right now, there is, as on the plans, on the upper floor unit, there are two spots in the back.
On the bottom floor, they have the back patio.
So those have areas for trash.
Do you have someone coming out weekly to take the trash out for trash day?
Yeah, essentially, I do it. And when there has been trash in the front, I do the same.
Understood. Thank you, Mr. George. Questions from the board?
Thank you.
Yes. As part of the visitor accommodations,
you are to have some sort of relationship with one of the services,
whether it's Rebo or what's the other one?
I can't think of the name of it.
But anyhow, do you already have a relationship with them
and some of the things that you're talking about
in terms of controlling visitor conduct.
They're already part of the city regulations
as well as those four.
That's right.
So have you had a relationship with them?
Do you have a relationship with them?
And that's my basic question.
I can reply.
Yeah, so he has an Airbnb relationship along with other providers. He's been actively ranking on Airbnb for a year. He has a 4.5 rating right now from short-term tenants. And Mr. George can go on further about the protocols that are in place with Airbnb and some of the other providers.
Okay, thank you so much. Questions from our attorney, Hillary Emerson.
Not at this time, Mr. Chair.
Questions from the audience?
Any questions from the virtual audience?
Vice Chair, I do not see any hands raised for this matter at this time.
Vice Chair, I do not see any hands raised for this matter at this time.
Thank you, Mr. Hamm.
Planning Commission.
Amy Boyd with the Planning Commission.
The comprehensive plan recommends though changing zoning at this location from the current residential multifamily RM1.
The appellant has not shown evidence of unique physical conditions or circumstances of the property
that would prevent it from being used in conformance with the zoning code for visitor accommodation.
the Planning Commission recommends the Board to deny the requested variance for visitor accommodation.
MI-2024-006164-2909 West Gerrard Avenue.
My vote is yes, with proviso, three-year temporary variance.
Michael Johns, my vote is yes.
Mr. Chair, we should put an ending date on that variance.
So maybe 2-28-28.
3-1-28 is fine
So ending 3-1-28
Yes, thank you
Michael Johns, my vote is yes with Proviso
Cheryl Gaston
My vote is yes with Proviso
Tanetta Graham, my vote is yes with Proviso
Tywin, my vote is yes with Proviso
Thank you, have a good day
Thank you so much
Number 17, MI-2024-006179
329 East Derrod Avenue
Now, Jason Crick is the attorney.
Please promote Mr. Crick.
I'll be coming back in as a panelist shortly.
This is a lot line relocation, two lots into one,
for an erection of a three-story structure with a full cellar and roof deck.
For the use of a vacant commercial on ground floor and multifamily household living,
three dwelling units in the fifth district overlay a maximum of two dwelling units is permitted on a
lot less than 1400 square feet in the area mr crick good morning members of the board my name
is justin crick i'm here on behalf of the applicant owners pat and tom mancini for the property at
329 East Girard Avenue.
I just want to correct. I believe that the
meeting idea is
202-4006-173.
I think you
had said 179,
but otherwise
all good.
173. And please state your name and spell it
for the court reporter, please.
Yes, Justin. Last name is Crick,
K-R-I-K.
You swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Please proceed.
board member Graham has a few
questions for you. Good morning.
Have you emailed all the required documents
and exhibits needed to proceed with this case
five days prior to this hearing?
Yes, I have.
And do you agree to waive the reading of the
refusal and stipulate to its
accuracy? I do.
Okay, thank you. You may proceed.
Thank you.
We do have a letter of support from the
Fishtown Neighbors Association.
Vote was in support of
23 we're in support 13 in opposition to abstain from this and we have a letter non-opposition
counseling young also a letter from Fishtown Kensington area business improvement district
please proceed thank you very much members of the board this is an application
to essentially it says while it says lot line relocation from two lots into one
I will represent that that has already been effectuated and carried out. That wasn't that
part of the need for the variance. But what we did apply for is for a new three-story mixed-use
multifamily building in which the ground floor would host both the commercial space and one of
the floors of one of the residential units. What we were refused for was that two units are
permitted, we are seeking three, which we believe is a de minimis request. And then the lot area
square footage is the requirements 1440. We have in this lot 1369. So we are less than 100 square
feet shy of being able to have additional units, or at least start to count towards additional
units. And the other was a dimensional variance that we're requesting, whereas there's 75%
is required for max occupied area square footage of the land. And we have proposed 86.1.
What you'll notice as we go through this is that this property is situated across two zoning
districts, CMX2 and RSA5. So the RSA5 information kind of plays in here and the requirements. But
The property is situated on East Girard Ave between East Columbia and East Ontario Street.
It is one of the two properties on this block that really has frontage on.
It is one of the two properties on this block that really has frontage on Girard Avenue.
And as you can see, and as I don't get closer in a minute, but the rear yard of this is adjacent to the rear yards of many, many buildings on each side of it and is much deeper than its adjacent or immediately adjacent next door neighbor.
and it's that lot depth that you'll see that kind of in an attempt to be as efficient as possible
with the space, the architect had designed a little bit longer of a building. So this is the
vacant lot that's in question. I will note that this owner, these owners have owned this property
since 2003. They are long-term members of this neighborhood. There was a structure here before
that had a business and a residence on top.
It became vacant and they have since demolished it.
And they're looking to continue ownership
within this area and putting up,
you know, this commercial mixed use building.
The property that you see to the right in this photo
that looks very unique and architecturally designed
with balconies on many levels
to give people access to outdoor space
was designed by the same architect
that has designed this property,
as you'll see in some of the renderings.
And therefore, as the neighborhood put it, it really does complement this style on the street frontage.
However, our property does not go up to four stories.
We are still only seeking three.
And one of the primary reasons for that is seeking a fourth story for that extra unit would lead to additional fire code requirements and egress requirements that would then obstruct further development
or useful space within the building so instead you'll see that this design is more of a lengthy
design as opposed to a vertical design and it'll be situated right in here you can see that there
is a business and the commercial makes use first floor on to its left when facing and another
also to the right when facing and we have continued to abide by that requirement by
having a first floor commercial unit so this is the lot depth of the combined lots and what you
can see from this uh this schematic is that there is still a nine foot yard setback and there is
below grade this is a very it's a full out walkout uh patio and it has egress ladder so you you'll
see that part of this unit a is located in the basement but it has full walkout in order to be
categorized as living space habitable for a bedroom and so forth um you you'll see that
the commercial unit is first floor in the front with basement and first floor unit residential
is in the rear. We have a second floor unit and a third floor unit. The commercial unit is
approximately 350 square feet on the first floor and an additional approximate 350 on the cellar
floor. However, because it is accessed by stairs, the space itself can only be calculated at the
at the first floor unit the basement can be potentially used for storage purposes but not for
actual customer use because the basement is not ada accessible um here's the presentation and
renderings that were prepared by kjo architecture you'll see from this as well as the floor
schematic which i will get to the layout a little in a moment that we are tying in in a sense to
the design that is already existing on this on this block uh and also providing a significant
amount of outdoor space for each unit so that those that don't have the roof deck accessible
like the third floor or the rear yard accessible, or at least the bottom part of that rear yard
accessible for the first floor, second floor unit also has some nice outdoor spaces. And I'll zoom
in a little bit. You can see that there's a little bit of a nook that the doors, some of these doors
are set back to. And as discussed with the neighborhood, this is a great place to put meters
and keep them off the street frontage and tuck them away as best as possible.
This is just another angle, and as you can see, this again, this nook here.
And then stepping back, you can see this larger scheme that really does add some texture
and contemporary design to the block, but it matches very well with this adjacent structure.
you can see here as the zoning map indicates that the rear portion of this lot is kind of
chopped off and stuck in this RSA area and that's why we're governed by both or the the the least
restrictive right I'm sorry yeah the most restrictive actually I'm sorry so when we get
into floor plans and layouts the first floor unit is a two-bedroom one-bath and in fact the bedrooms
And, in fact, the bedrooms have been kept on the first floor, but there is habitable living space on the basement level with the below-grade patio fully walkout.
have been kept on the first floor, but there is habitable living space.
This also will indicate that there is a covered alley that extends all the way to the rear of the property, both for egress purposes, but also to allow for trash storage and access by all occupants of the building to place storage in there.
As it was discussed with the neighborhood, the trash will be handled by the city, especially because they do have a place to store it off the front and off the street.
And additionally, the commercial space, when discussing with the bid, the business improvement district and the RCO, we recognize that the space may be a little smaller than usual.
And with this depth, there was discussion about, you know, maybe increasing the space of the commercial space.
But practically speaking, everybody understood that moving the stairwell and and kind of shrinking this first floor unit would would not be advisable.
But we did discuss the possibility of someone like a professional office building, a professional business office, potentially a barber or a small craft or nook store, something like a boutique store that the owners would like to see in this property.
And again, they've owned it for over 20 years and intend to continue to own it.
The entryway to that first floor is directly at the street frontage, whereas, I'm sorry,
the entry to the second and third floors is at the street frontage.
There's a designated entrance for commercial space and then this closed designated door
for the covered alley to the rear.
When you come up to the second floor, you'll find the second floor unit, which has two
bedrooms, two baths.
And I can go into the design a little bit more.
and similarly with the third floor we have two bedroom two bath this this unit the second floor
unit is approximately 850 square feet the first floor unit's approximately 797 and the and you
can see I'm sorry this is 849 to be exact and then third floor unit is 1036 each of the units
as you can see has ample outdoor opportunities to have some light in there and the third floor
has access to this roof deck. Just a couple elevations that you can see again this outdoor
space and this fenced off area that leads to the underground patio that gives privacy but also has
the egress availability. When again we met with the Fishtown Business Improvement District they
were very supportive this letter of support is included for your reference. I also did I'll jump
down to it include the the letter from the registered community organization and just to
get to the highlight of it you can see that it did get support 23 votes um and support was given
there was some opposition but this was discussed at a at a meeting that had approximately 50 uh
50 neighbors or so 50 residents and so uh there was a lot of deliberation over it and we appreciated
the support from the FNA. I am also providing an exemplar copy of the first page of the deed,
but the entire deed package, recorded deed, has been submitted separately. And as you can see,
they are current on taxes, but for 2025, which will be paid shortly. And again, they've been
owners for the last 22 years. We did send notice to the RCO and had our meeting on February 4th.
and evidence of all the notices, as you can see over here, have been sent certified mail with
the receipt. We believe that this proposal will not create any hardship on neighboring properties.
It will not impair the light or use of those properties. It will not increase congestion in
public streets or increase the burden on any public facilities. We also believe that it is
the minimum variance that we are seeking with a nominal square footage coverage increase and
only going from two allowable units increasing by one. And essentially based upon the fact that
the length of the property, where it's situated, and somewhat concern of the double overlay of
zoning, we believe that this use, if it had to follow literal enforcement of the code,
would create a hardship um i do have let me just double check that that is all the little the parts
um i do have pat mancini available to uh adopt my testimony
pat if you can raise your hand please the panel will be returning shortly
They have been promoted to panelists. They will be returning shortly.
Ms. Mancini, can you please state your name and spell it for the court reporting?
Patrick Dunn Mancini, D-A-T-R-I-C-K-D-U-N-N-M-A-N-C-I-N-I.
Do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, or nothing but the truth?
Mr. Mancini, have you had an opportunity to hear the testimony I've given to the board today?
Yes. And to the best of your knowledge, were the statements that I made true and correct?
Yes. And would you adopt those statements as your own testimony if you were present today?
Yes. Thank you. Questions from the board? Yes. Can you go back to the floorplanes?
what's what's the depth of the rear yard is there a rear yard yes well it's taken up directly to
that yard it's the patio let me go back to this so the rear yard depth is nine feet
and the patio lies within that nine feet at the shortest point gotcha
thank you thank you any other questions from the board
questions from our attorney hillary emerson um yes just briefly um mr kirk you indicated at the
beginning of your presentation that the lot line adjustment that was referenced in the refusal
was already taken care of can you explain what you mean by that uh that that the um i should say
that the architect has received and obtained
the consolidation plan that has been approved by,
and I can share it if necessary,
but it has been approved by city planning
and stamped by the district.
So as far as I'm aware, they have,
I did not check to see if a deed was formally put on,
but both of these legal descriptions
are contained on the deed to the property.
and it would just have been a matter of combining the the legal descriptions but for
all intents and purposes they they have received all the approval from the city planning commission
uh and i think they still need to have a zoning permit though for the consolidation so i think
that it still needs to be on here oh i yes it should be granted i just we didn't get a refusal
for it is i guess where i was going with that but yeah no that's where that's where i was a little
bit confused my my bad no we do need it approved it just it wasn't a refusal yes no i i agree um
and thank you excuse me and speaking of the refusal there's actually a number of errors
on the refusal um that i uh discussed with ellen i yesterday uh the lot adjustment actually should
be written differently because it's two deeded lots but one opa lot that's being consolidated
into one lot um and i think that it seems like the project was reviewed under cmx2 instead of rsa5
um and because i think it should have been reviewed under rsa5 because that's a significant
portion of the lot so then the refusals would actually be different there would be a refusal
for uh no multi-family household living instead of looking at the lot area to determine um
So, and there was a couple other minor things, too, but those were the biggest things that were issues.
Yes, about a third of the lot is RSA 5, so I believe in those circumstances it would be reviewed under RSA 5 or should have been.
So, I was going to ask L&I to issue a corrected refusal so that it correctly reflects what's happening in this case and how it was reviewed.
um i guess even with those refusals uh i don't i i don't know i mean we we still conceptually it's
it's the project is the same yes yeah yes no exactly the project the project is the same
you know you're that's what we let you you'll present today there's nothing sure it's just
that the the refusal needs to be corrected to reflect what's what's actually going on so there
isn't confusion down the line about what was what was done but we can we can hear everything finish
finish up today close the record except for the corrected refusal and then just just vote it once
we get it and we'll try to get that within the next week or two understood okay all right thank
you questions from the audience questions from the virtual audience yes i have a hand up from
robert everett they have been allowed to speak they'll be back in shortly as a panelist thank
Thank you. Good afternoon. Please state your name and spell it for the court reporter.
Thank you. Good afternoon. Please state your name and spell it for the court reporter.
Good afternoon.
Good afternoon. Am I on?
You're on. Please state your name and spell it for the court reporter, please.
Sure. First name, Robert. Last name, Everett. E-V-E-R-E-T-T.
You swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
Please proceed, Mr. Everett.
I represent Fishtown Neighbors Association
Zoning Committee and just
concurring with the information you
already have in the packet.
Thank you so much for coming on.
You're welcome. Anyone else out in the virtual
audience?
No other hands, Mr. Chair.
Planning Commission.
Amy Boyd with the Planning Commission.
Sorry, one moment.
The comprehensive plan recommends no change in zoning at this location from the existing single-family RSI-5 and commercial mixed-use CMX-2.
The appellant has not demonstrated that there are unique physical circumstances or conditions of the property that would prevent it from being used in conformance with the zoning code.
The planning commission recommends that the board deny the requested variance for household living unit count and max-occupied area.
Thank you.
So, Mr. Crick, we're going to actually close the case outside of waiting for the amended corrected refusal, and we'll vote that within 30 days from the day we receive it.
If I may, well, if the record is still open, I believe that if there is a consolidation that we would assume that this property receives just the CMX designation, because that's the majority of the square footage of the land once consolidation is complete.
But I recognize Ms. Emerson's assessment of the standard of review at this time.
Yes, and once there's a third of the property, we have to still go with that.
Understood.
it. All right. Thank you so much. Thank you. Thank you, too. Bye-bye.
Number 18, MI-2024-006176, 2144 South 57th Street, Attorney Steve Masters.
Mr. Masters is here.
Please state your name and spell it for the court reporter, Mr. Masters.
Hit the button.
Sorry about that.
Good afternoon, Mr. Chair and members of the board.
Steve Masters, S-T-E-V-E, M-A-S-T-E-R-S, with the law firm of JustLaws.
can you please uh do you swear to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth
i do um our board member mrs graham has a few questions for you good afternoon have you emailed
all the required documents and exhibits needed to proceed with this case five days prior to this
hearing um yes we have and then we've um updated our exhibit binder this morning with the rco notice
of the RCO letter of support.
Okay, and do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal
and stipulate to its accuracy?
Thank you.
So, Mr. Masters, as we were pulling up your presentation,
for use of a two-family household living within an existing structure,
the refusal was for two-family household living
is prohibited in an RSA 5 zone and district.
Do we have a letter of support from the Southwest Philadelphia
the consortium of RCOs, and we can move forward.
Did you say I may proceed?
Oh, thank you.
Hello, members of the board.
We are here.
My client is Michael Monegatwali.
He operates an LLC called Ocean Blue Holdings.
He is the owner of 2144 South 57th Street.
I think I'll just start by saying that Mr. Michael obtained a building permit to have an addition and to put a roof deck on the structure as a single family.
That was back in 2021.
It's permit RP 2021-015542.
So as we go through the photos, you'll see that there is some new construction there.
The application is to provide for duplex.
The application is to provide for duplex as opposed to a single family.
And the basic story that we shared with the community, this property is one of the only properties on the block that was renovated.
It's a block of primarily older construction, quite a bit older.
And a lot of the other houses on the block are in various states of disrepair.
Our client has created, well, he hasn't finished the construction.
It's all basically down to the studs, as we'll see.
But he has been putting in a lot of tender, loving care to this structure.
um the cost though of of of renting it if it was to be a single family with with um the three
stories and everything would be would be beyond what the normal market rate is for this neighborhood
so he is proposing two units which would allow it to be more naturally occurring affordable housing
And that was very popular. I'm going to go to the petitions. So he was able to circulate petitions. He had actually an injury recently, but he nonetheless was able to go out door to door and get these signatures.
We have 25 petitions of support of all neighbors within the 250 feet.
And then we have here the RCO notice of support in which the RCO reported that of the RCO members,
There were two in support of the participants at the RCO meeting.
All five of the neighbors were in support.
They have four suggested provisos that we are in agreement with, but we believe that
your board of counsel may not consider them to be appropriate provisos for the permit.
A certificate of occupancy is, of course, required to operate a duplex.
We are fine with putting signage on the building so the neighbors know who the responsible party is, exterior lighting to illuminate the right-of-way, and to enrolling in the safe cam program with the police department.
All of those are what we were happy to agree to at the RCO meeting.
Let's look at some of the photos.
Oh, actually, first, these are the plans.
And so this is our site plan.
Let's go up here.
This is our side elevation, and you'll see the pilot house.
This is the front elevation.
The rear elevation is down here, and the other side elevation.
In terms of floor plans, there's no dwelling use at all in the basement.
For the first floor, we have the living and dining room area, a bathroom, then a bedroom of 150 square feet.
that is one of two bedrooms for the for the first floor apartment with these with a dark black
border everything on one side of the border is one unit so this going up the stairs to the second
floor there's a rear bedroom that is connected to the dwelling unit on the first floor and then on
the second floor in order to arrive to the second floor for that apartment you go up the stairs
from the from the front door the porch and you get into the kitchen dining area on the second
floor and then you'll find the two bedrooms one's 150 square feet the other is 130 square feet
those are on the third floor and then there is a roof deck with a pilot house that is
already been approved and constructed so let's look at the photos now as I said
everything is down to the studs this is the second floor can you zoom out so
that we can see the whole photo at once sure thank you
Thank you.
Is that good?
All right.
Second floor.
We have the third floor.
This is the second floor, and there's the partition between the rear bedroom that belongs to the first floor and the other space.
Here's the third floor steps that lead up to the pilot house.
the third floor, the first floor.
Here's a view of the front of the building.
Our building is here
with the newly constructed third floor up there.
This is a view from the side.
This is an alleyway and you can see the pilot house
just peeking up from on top of the third story and here we have the rear view this is the backyard
and you can see the the new construction that brought out both it extended the second floor
and crater to the third floor we posted the zoning notices for the hearing let's make it bigger as
you can see for today's date this is our notices on the door of the house
and we also have a no trespassing notice there was concerns raised by the community that because
this has been a vacant um you know use for for a number of years there are transients who
who basically apparently use the the porch area to hang out and and do their thing and so
that will obviously stop when someone is living there but that's why they want lights and other
things that are going to deter those folks from being able to do that. And we have a tax
tax revenue clearance that is good for this period of time. We have the
the deed showing ocean blue holdings is the owner of the property we also have
our application for appeal and our project information form
and then the rco notice letter that was sent by the mail to all of these addresses supplied by
the planning commission and our proof of mailing went to 137 locations and at this point I will
call my client Michael it's challenging last name but Moon Yantawali please raise your hand and be
sworn in.
Mr. Manchawali?
We also have Stanley Mina, I believe, who was standing by also, although it's been quite a bit of time since the 930 list was called. He's the, he wrote the plans for the, for the project.
They're coming back in now as a panelist, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Mr. Hand.
Can you please state your name and spell it for the court report, please?
Michael, it looks like you are still muted.
yes can you hear me now yes yes spell it for the court reporter
um my communion twally m-i-c-h-a-e-l last name is m-u-n-y-a-n-t-w-l-i
you swear to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth
Yes, I do.
Please proceed, counsel.
Michael, were you present and heard my testimony today?
Yes, I did.
Do you believe that it was true and accurate, and do you accept it as your own?
Yes, it was.
Wonderful.
Is there anything else that you wanted to add to the presentation to tell the board about this project?
Yeah, I basically wanted to state that I received actually quite a good response from the neighbors when I walked around.
Unfortunately, I sprained my ankle and I actually have a doctor's appointment in a few minutes, but I've been walking with Christ.
I actually have a doctor's appointment in a few minutes, but I've been working with crutches, you know, for the last two weeks.
But all the neighbors, I think I received almost 99% of the support of the neighbors when I told them that I was planning on doing affordable housing and converting it instead of a five bedroom, making it a duplex.
So they were very supportive of the plans.
Thank you.
um any it's up to you mr chair for questions any questions from the board yes i have a few one can
you go back to the floor plans sure and what's the plan for the basement as it relates to that first
unit uh the basement is only going to be just for uh uh for the heater and uh and you just it's just
just to be a utility room it's not going to be used by any of the occupants and then is it going
to only be accessible to the unit on the first floor or are you as the owner going to retain
some access to the basement for property maintenance yes i'm going to retain access
to the basement so as you can see in the plans i believe my architect has uh there's going to be
steps from the on the front going into the basement and only me the landlord will have
access to it. Okay, got it. And then my second question is, I see that you pulled a building
permit from LNI in January of 2022, something that has now since expired. And so one, I'm
wondering, have you talked to your LNI inspector to be able to complete the work? And what's
your timeline right now to finish work at the site for what you were previously approved yeah so
basically i spoke to the inspector and i explained to him i was trying to uh get change the zoning
and get him turn it into his duplex and he basically came and looked and saw the framing
and says let me know uh what the zoning committee decides and then we can move ahead and uh you know
can continue if they're if they they give me the zoning to do the duplex or if not then we'll just
retain we'll we'll keep it as it as is and then when you purchased the property what was the
interior condition oh it was it was actually terrible i wish i had had pictures before
because i gathered it all out it was literally in a dilapidated state the entire neighborhood
was so excited that i had bought the place and uh i was going to develop it because it was in a
very very very bad state all the joists were literally demolished so i literally had to
it was just the walls that were fine so i literally took my time and did new joists
throughout the entire house so it's all new interior framing so the only thing that's
existing is the exterior walls i would say a good portion of the second and third floor the first
floor was fine the joists were fine but then on the on the second and third floor i had to literally
doing it's all new joists and you said because that was under the previous alteration permit
that was inspected by correct correct um and then what is your plan currently with the new
layout that you're seeking to approve for the hvac well the hvac i usually like putting hvac and
electrical yeah i usually of course they're going to be uh it will be a 400 amp service and maybe
100 amp for each apartment but I usually do uh I'll either do a split system or I'll do
the DAC system and each unit will have its own unit so I would probably put the condenser on the
on the pilot house and the condenser for the first floor will be in the rear yard because there's
there's quite a big there's I think over over 12 feet in the back so I'll put the condenser there
and then the heater will go in the basement but you have no plans so there's no actual
shop drawings or plans uh we i think we do the what my attorney has submitted are those are the
plans yeah but they don't you don't have anything to address the hvc or the electric no we haven't
we haven't done the mep this just those are just the building plans for now
building plans are not a full set you don't have a full set yeah exactly i mean it's for zoning
it's yeah no i understand that but here's already construction happening my concern is that this was
already started to be changed into a two-bedroom unit i mean it's already been framed as a
multi-family and it hasn't been improved as a multi-family and the zoning permit and the
building permit say it was for a single family but some of the work for what we are reviewing
But some of the work for what we are reviewing right now has already been completed.
right now has already been completed so i'm just
So I'm just trying to get all the facts of where it is and what's going on.
Yeah, we had initially just done the building plans.
Then we're going to do the MEP plans.
Then I realized it was going to be, you know, it was going to be too prohibitive or, you
know, it wasn't affordable for the amount of square footage.
It was going to be a bit too big for a five bedroom house in the neighborhood.
so I when I sat down and looked at the numbers I thought it would be a financial hardship
and I that's when I approached my zoning lawyer and said maybe I can try and convert it into a
two-bedroom a multi-family. Understood. Any other questions from the board? Yes. Can you tell me
about this addition? When was it approved and when did you construct this addition on this property?
I believe
after I got the building permit
so I did that in 2023
permit for
the addition is
it was started in 2021
it's a residential
construction permit
015542
that authorized the
construction of the pilot house
and the additional
okay thank you any other questions from the board member
uh questions from our training attorney hillary emerson
not at this time mr chair any questions from the audience or the virtual audience
chair i have a hand up from craig maladosian mr maladosian please promote him
okay he'll be rejoining shortly
good afternoon mr maladosian please state your name and spell it for the court reporter
He muted, promoted him, but okay, he's been promoted now.
Thank you.
Good afternoon, Mr. Melodosin.
Please state your name and spell it for the court reporter.
Oh, he's back to be muted.
Melodosin, if you're still available, please unmute and wait to be sworn in.
But someone else has to hand up with Craig Melodosin.
They've been allowed to speak.
All right.
I have two devices.
The one device crashed.
That's why I went to the other device.
Thank you.
No problem.
Please state your name and spell it for the court reporter.
Craig, C-R-A-I-G.
last name Melodosian
M-E-L-I-D-O-S-I-A-N
Do you swear to tell the truth
the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
I do, Chair Shahid.
Please proceed.
I wanted to address this.
We are supporting the project.
We may not have supported it
in all its aspects
had it come to us
at a different point of time.
There are certain RCOs
in Southwest Philly
similar to those
in Strawberry Mansion
and Point Breeze
that continue to be opposed to the roof decks.
However, this passed prior to coming to us,
and we are anxious to get new, clean housing in Southwest.
Of course, this is not truly affordable housing,
but nonetheless, the market will bear out
whatever Michael can do in terms of renting it.
We did have one concern since it came up
during the review of the floor plans.
The current plan, and we did raise it at the RCO's meeting,
the current plan shows a proposed excavation
in the sidewalk leading to the basement.
We thought that that was a less than elegant solution
that it posed an obstacle for people perhaps falling into it,
trash going into it, or other things happening in it.
And we suggested that that access to the basement be constructed through a trap door on the floor of the front porch.
I've managed other real estate in the past in University City that's had that type of access to the basement for utilities where, in fact, there was not adequate room.
to the basement for utilities where in fact there was not adequate room on the sidewalk we don't
believe that that entranceway into the basement enhances the walkability of the sidewalk in front
of it and and in fact may pose potential problems for people loitering in there or trash blowing in
there and with that i think we set forth everything else uh within our uh our letter of support to
the board thank you very much thank you very much thank you craig i don't have any objection
right but our client is is fine with with putting the access to the basement through the
through the porch, through some kind of a trapdoor on the porch.
Thank you. Any other questions?
Anyone else out in the virtual audience?
Mr. Shahid, I just wanted to interject in terms of the provisos
that the RCO had listed.
The only one that we could include as enforceable
would be the request for a certificate of occupancy,
which is like since there's building permits in this case
would likely be part of the process anyway.
Thank you.
Should we do no basement living?
um the board wishes the board can do that okay there's no plan for basement living so
so we would be in favor of that yeah all right was anyone else out in the virtual audience
i do not see any further hands with the chair thank you mr hand planning commission amy boyd
with the planning commission the comprehensive plan recommends no change in zoning at this location
from an existing single-family residential RSA 5.
We note for the board that absent participation
in a city-state, federal program, or city zoning initiative,
affordability mentioned in the appellant's testimony
cannot be enforced by any city agency.
The appellant has not demonstrated
that there are unique physical conditions
or circumstances of the property
that would prevent it from being used
in conformance with the zoning code.
The Planning Commission recommends
the board deny the requested variance
for two-family household living.
mi-2024-0061762144 south 57th street my vote is yes with proviso required a certificate of
occupancy as well as no living in basement michael johnson right right michael johns
My vote is yes, with proviso.
Cheryl Gaston, my vote is no.
Tanetta Graham, my vote is yes, with proviso.
Tywin, my vote is yes, with proviso.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Is there anyone else out in the virtual audience whose case has not been heard for the 930 case?
I do not see any further answer, Mr. Chair.
Thank you.
We will proceed back at 2 o'clock.
Thank you.
Good afternoon, my name is Ishmael Shahid, and I will be chairing this meeting of the
Philadelphia Zoning Board of Adjustments.
With me today is board member Cheryl Gaston.
Present, Mr. Chairman.
Board member Tenetta Graham.
Present, Mr. Chairman.
Board member Michael Johns.
Present, Mr. Chairman.
and board member tyah winn present mr chairman also present is hillary emerson our attorney
and ian haggerty our executive director of the zoning board and our board administrator
lakeisha dandy i will now turn it over to mr ian
thank you chair good afternoon everyone welcome to the zba hearing room
um please be advised this meeting is being recorded and your participation in the meeting
indicates your consent to be recorded. The video from the hearing will be posted on the ZBA website
approximately one week following today's hearing. This meeting is being held in person with remote
capabilities, meaning that individuals can participate either here in person or remotely
over Zoom. When you're recognized to speak by the board, please state and spell your name for the
court reporter and then wait to be sworn in. If you're in the hearing room, you have to speak
into a microphone so everyone in attendance, including the folks online, can hear you.
If you're participating remotely, please turn on your camera and unmute yourself when you're
recognized to speak. Once you're sworn in, please state your name each time before testifying
so the court reporter knows who's speaking. Please mute yourself or turn off the microphone
when you're not speaking. If you're participating by phone, press star nine to raise your hand and
star six to unmute. Please call 267-270-5548 to register your appearance by the close of the
business day after the hearing if you're participating by phone. You have to provide
You have to provide an email address and the address of the property you're interested in.
an email address and the address of the property you're interested in. For everyone else,
For everyone else, you can enter your appearance with the Zoom registration page.
For folks here in the room, we have a QR code at the back of the room to register your appearance.
If you need assistance, just see a staff member and we can help you get registered.
If you have any questions about registering your appearance, you can also email us at rcozba at phila.gov.
If you're in the hearing room, please refrain from talking or engaging in conversation.
while the hearings are being conducted.
Eating and drinking in the hearing room is prohibited.
And in addition, verbal and physical aggression
will not be tolerated.
If you're participating remotely,
remember that the Q&A on Zoom
is not for testimony or comments.
If you have concerns related to hearing operations,
please email me at cvaexecutivedirector at phila.gov.
Folks in the room, I want to remind you,
safety is our highest priority here.
In the event of an emergency,
please pay attention to the announcements that are made over the loudspeaker. If there's no
announcement, look for direction from either a ZBA staffer or from building security personnel.
The main exit is through those double doors at the rear of the room where you came in.
If an order is given to evacuate the room, the nearest stairway is to the left outside the main
exit from this room. Follow the exit signs to the stairway. If we have to evacuate the building,
we will receive direction to do so the rally point is at love park directly across arch street from
the public entrance to the building please remain at the rally point in that event so that we can
account for you and lastly restrooms are located across from the elevators and there's a water
fountain just outside the double doors to the right mr chair thank you and uh going straight
into our continuances uh mi-2024-002476-5229 market street is requesting a continuance is
brandon saverneville good afternoon mr chair this is jason hand i will be your calls for this session
Mr. Saverin is coming back in as a panelist now. Thank you, Mr. Hand.
Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman. Good afternoon, counsel. Please state your name and spell it
for the court report. Brandon Saverin, B-R-A-N-D-O-N, then S is in Sam, A, V is in Victor,
R-A-N is in Nancy. Do you agree to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Please proceed.
This is the second continuance request for this matter.
I represent the applicant Urban League of Philadelphia.
The party with whom the Urban League is transacting to acquire the property is awaiting a deed from the Philadelphia sheriff.
So we'd like to fully resolve that title issue before proceeding to the board.
Thank you, Council. MI 2024-002476-5229 Market Street is being continued to August 20th, 2025 at 2 o'clock, 3.30.
Is that, sorry, that may not be for the 2 o'clock listening. That was the times for the.
Okay. All right. So apologize about that, Brandon.
Sure. So it's going to be continued to July 9th, 2025 at two o'clock.
July 9th. Okay. Okay. Thank you very much.
All right. Thanks. All right. We have no more continuances. Is there any other continuance in the virtual audience or in the audience?
I do not see any hands raised, Mr. Chair.
All right. Going on to our add-ons. We have no add-ons, so we're going to go ahead and continue on through.
Number 5, MI 2024-006-009-4210, Teasdale Street, William and Deanne Goodman.
William Goodman should be coming back in as a panel shortly.
Mr. Chair. Thank you.
Good afternoon. Please state your name and spell it for the court reporter.
Mr. Goodman, please accept the invitation to become panelists.
Thank you.
Mrs. or Mr. Goodman, are you out there in a virtual
audience. Thank you.
Okay, Mr. Chair, it doesn't look like he's in the virtual audience anymore.
Are you able to unmute your phone?
Okay, he's up to the panelist now.
Good afternoon, sir.
Can you please state your name and spell it for the court reporter?
we can hear you talking
but we can see you talking but not hear you talking
please turn up your volume if you may
Mr. Gutman
can't hear you
we're going to come back to you and see if we can park you
and get you up to date with some technology.
Moving on to the next one.
Number six, MI-2024-006748,
4283 Viola Street,
I have a hard time too, Mr. Chair.
i'm sorry i butcher it up a lot i blame my husband it's all his fault all right
you please uh state your name and spell it for the court reporter meredith ferlinger f-e-r-l-e-g-e-r
you swear to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth i do
mr masters state your name and spell it for the court reporter good afternoon mr chair members
of the board steve masters s-t-e-v-e-m-a-s-t-e-r-s with the law firm of just laws can you spread
it to the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth i do thank you and mr masters can you
just identify your clients for the record um yes my clients are the viola street
residents association and other any other objectors to this project thank you uh we're
going to start off with mrs merida council and yes we actually we know that since they're they're um
two attorneys in this case um and and one representing protestants we realize this
matter we may not get through this matter today in its entirety um so we would like to find out
from each of you um how many witnesses you intend to call so we can get a sense of um how long this
case may take um meredith sure um i don't believe i identified it when i introduced myself but my
client is haverford square viola llc the owner of the property i only have one witness today
my presentation is a fairly standard uh length presentation uh but i i do only have one witness
of course, would want to reserve the right to cross-examine any of Mr. Master's witnesses as
well. Understood. Understood. I am trying to pull it up. I have, I believe, five or six witnesses
that are going to have different things to testify to. Okay. Can we just ensure that they're not
coming up and testifying on the same thing? We want to have different testimonies if possible.
different testimonies if possible we've prepared them to do very different testimonies um one one
We've prepared them to do very different testimonies.
from the other so we we respect that that the board uh desires us to do it that way okay excuse
me pardon the interruption this is the court reporter could i please ask those speaking to
get a little closer to the microphone thank you sorry thank you mr kelly um mr chair given the
length of the list that we have today and some other contested um matters i would recommend that
we could try to get through miss ferlinger's presentation since she only has one witness
we'll keep an eye on on the time but that may be as far as we can we can get today and we will
obviously um resume this in the near future all right council miss ferlinger that understood uh
i'm at the board's prerogative whatever you feel is appropriate all right let's proceed
Thank you. Again, good afternoon, Mr. Chairman. One second, Council. Can you, Board Counsel,
Mrs. Graham has a few additional questions to ask. Oh, sure. Good afternoon. Have you emailed
all the required documents and exhibits needed to proceed with this case five days prior to this
hearing? I did, yes. Thank you. And do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate
to us accuracy. Yes, I do. Thank you. Again, good afternoon, Mr. Chairman, members of the board,
Meredith Ferliger of Dilworth Paxson. My client here today is Haverford Square Viola LLC, the
owner of the property, represented by today by member German Yakubov. The request before the
board today concerns 4283 Viola Street. You have an exhibit packet in front of you that contains
20 exhibits, which we request be moved into evidence at the conclusion of the presentation
today. To summarize the basis for today's request, this application requires a variance
for the proposed multifamily use in the RSA 5 zoning district, as is shown on the refusal
at Exhibit 1. I will first orient you to the location of the property. The deed, as well
as tax clearance, which was updated today, is included at Exhibit 2. And I have included tax
clearance for all three of the properties, although they are now consolidated. I did include
them for all three, as well as the deed at Exhibit 3. As you can see here on the aerial at Exhibit 7,
this property is a vacant lot on Viola Street, just east of Belmont Avenue. Belmont Avenue is
over here in the image to the east. From the rear, you'll notice that this property directly
adjoins structures that front on Parkside Avenue. By way of more complete context,
in the next aerial, you'll see an outline of the applicant's associated development
proposal on Parkside Avenue, which is not before the board, as that project was approved by Wright
last year. And you can see the outline of that project here and how that relates to the project
before the board today on Viola Street. At the zoning map at Exhibit 5, you'll note that this
property is zoned RSA5 and is surrounded to the rear and to the west by RM1 as well as CMX2
classifications. Notably, this block was rezoned in 2014, as is shown in the remapping ordinance
at Exhibit 6. Interestingly, you may notice on the proposed zoning map, which I've highlighted
here and I'll zoom in on, that the CMX2 zoning classification was supposed to have extended
further down the block onto Viola Street than is currently reflected on the actual zoning maps
retained by the city. So again, if you look just here at this area that I'm highlighting with my
cursor, and then if I flip back to the zoning map, you'll notice the discrepancy in how that line was
actually drawn once the GIS maps were updated. Current street view photographs are included
at Exhibit 8. You will see here the vacant lot with portions of the lot having been vacant for
decades. Photographs of the timely posting are also included, showing that the posters were
posted on February 5th, 2025. The next, and again, these are some of those posting photographs
showing the timely posting. This next photograph I have here shows the property in relation to
Belmont Avenue, which again is just to the west of the property. The structure immediately to the west
which again is just to the west of the property. The structure immediately to the west is also
shown here, which is currently used as a daycare for an unknown number of children.
The next photograph is looking southeast from the subject property,
showing the mixed two- and three-story structures on this block.
And again, another view here is shown on the opposing side of the street,
which is predominantly two-story, with the same side of the street being predominantly three-story.
At Belmont Avenue, right across from the Viola intersection, as shown here, is the Discovery Charter School.
Almost immediately west of the subject property, and again fronting on Belmont Avenue, is a Philadelphia fire station.
by way of context i did mention earlier that this property is contiguous
to the applicant's other development on parkside avenue which is not yet built a view of that lot
is shown in this next photograph for full context where you can see all the way through to viola
street as you can see on the consolidation plan at exhibit 9 the lot is 3920 square feet
You can see in the rear that the property shares a rear lot line with the applicant's adjoining property at 4262 Parkside Avenue, which is part of the larger development, which includes 4262 through 4274 Parkside Avenue.
the proposal for 4283 viola street is shown on the zoning plan at exhibit 10
and includes one new four-story structure to include 16 dwelling units or four per four per
floor the building is proposed to be a detached structure and let me zoom in a little bit more
on the zoning plan leaving a five-foot buffer to the east on on this side of the property
as well as approximately eight and a half feet a little bit more than that actually to the west
a four foot curb cut is also proposed only to facilitate the efficient removal of trash
commercial pickup will be required the building itself is only proposed to occupy 63 percent of
this lot far less than the 75 percent that would be permitted providing ample outdoor space
no basement is proposed the number of units here is truly dictated both by the layout as well as
based on the affordability structure for this project with a mix of unit types sizes as well
as accessibility floor plans are included at exhibit 11 and i will zoom in on those as well
this plan shows that the trash enclosures are proposed to sit behind an enclosed
fence to shield the area from public view. The first floor has a common mailroom and a lobby.
Electrical panels would be installed in the rear of the property as shown on the floor plans.
Throughout the building, the units are roughly similar in size between 459 square feet and 507
square feet. With a rectangular detached building, the units are well designed with ample windows
for light and air and again this is the first floor rendering the second and third second
through fourth floors are substantively similar and we certainly are happy to answer any questions
on the layouts themselves at exhibit 12 zoom back out again we've included a preliminary rendering
this rendering is likely to continue to be updated as the design continues to progress
particularly on the park side development, because as I mentioned, this is intended to be an extension of that development.
As you can see here, no door is designed to be provided on Viola Street.
And if I scroll back up to the floor plans, you'll see that reflected on the floor plans as well with the doors proposed from the sides of the building.
And I'll address that a little bit further in the presentation.
The reason for this design, as I mentioned, is that this proposal is intended to complement and act as an extension of the applicant's already approved development on Parkside Avenue.
I've included additional information on that project at Exhibit 13, where you will see that 4274 Parkside Avenue and all of the associated addresses were approved for 49 dwelling units.
were approved for 49 dwelling units. On the approved plans, scroll down there,
On the approved plan,
the relationship between 4274 Parkside and the current lots on Viola is made more clear.
To the right, zoom in more for you, to the right here in gray, 4262 Parkside is an existing
structure that will be accompanied by a new structure to the left in this orientation.
Two-thirds of the Viola lots sit directly behind this new proposal. Again, you can see here 4287,
4285, and then the third lot is a little bit further down.
two-thirds of these lots sit directly behind the new proposal and the intent here is to create a
cohesive combined development with shared common space and outdoor areas
now regarding the refusal only one refusal was issued for the proposed multi-family use
the project itself is quite under built for this lot the applicant submits to several
hardships, which my client will supplement in a moment, in erecting a new single-family home on
this lot or any variety of this lot for several reasons. First and foremost, this lot is not
zoned in accordance with the City Planning Commission's district plan, which specifically
encouraged zoning to avoid a mismatch in zoning in comparison to current use to avoid unnecessary
zoning variances. As is shown at Exhibit 16, zoom in on this, this entire block was recommended to be zoned RM1 to allow for multifamily, but for a separate community-led plan that resulted in the rezoning of this area that is contrary to the stated goals of the district plan.
If this block have retained its intended zoning, the applicant could have used a mixed income housing bonus, in addition to other bonuses available in the code, and would be just a few units shy of the instant proposal.
In fact, with a green roof bonus, it's very likely that this proposal would have been entirely by right.
I'm going to object to that testimony because the green roof bonus and the mixed income bonus are not part of their they don't apply to this property in any way.
So right now, opposing counsel is engaging in some kind of fantastical world in which she can create different bonuses and different density issues that do not exist in the actual zoning code.
So I'm going to ask for her to stick to what's actually in the zoning code.
And respectfully speaking, the point that I am making to the board here is that the property is not zoned in accordance with the city planning commission's district plan.
And certainly the applicant can offer testimony about what would have been allowed by right had the planning commission's district plan been put into action.
It is not hypothetical. It is simply what the code would allow if this plan, which is a stated district plan, had been put into action. That is not fanciful testimony, respectfully so.
To be clear, city council zones and passes and enacts zoning changes. And in this case, we have in front of us what the zoning is for this property, whatever, whatever opposing council would like it to be is just part of her desires, but not but not part of the actual reality of what we're looking at.
Council, if you may please stick to the facts of the actual project.
it. Furthermore, the Viola Street plan, which is included in Mr. Master's exhibits, encouraged the
creation of a vibrant residential community that is affordable for the neighborhood. Yet the
resulting rezoning was entirely contrary to those stated goals, particularly since this particular
developer is an active participant in PHA's voucher program and has a documented commitment
to providing affordable housing across West Philadelphia, including in this very neighborhood.
Furthermore, as I referenced earlier and is shown quite clearly in the opponent's exhibits at page
41, the CMX2 zoning was supposed to have extended further down Viola Street and include at least a
portion of the property before the board today, but for what we assume to be a simple GIS mapping error.
but for what we assume to be a simple GIS mapping error.
Due to at least in part pre-existing conditions of economic distress,
which are referenced in the introduction of a May 2013 report
concerning the block by the community design collaborative titled Project Reclaim,
and again, which is included in the opponent's exhibits,
there appear to have been no instances of new construction on this block
since its 2014 downzoning, despite the continuous presence of at least 25 vacant lots since that
time. Two of which are part of this instant application. Excuse me, can I finish my
testimony before you object to it? Larry, please testify. Okay. Counsel, what have you, before you
go back, just want to get a little clarity on the record. Is these parcels directly associated with
anything of philadelphia housing authority no okay thank you please proceed
despite the rezoning this area remains predominantly multifamily
exhibit 14 outlines this quite abundantly and this data is pulled directly from the city of
philadelphia public records first the property immediately next door to the west as i pointed
out earlier is a daycare center. With the entire swath of property to the west and north ripe for
significant multifamily development based on their current zoning classification, the character of
this neighborhood is such that it would be an extreme hardship to facilitate single-family
development on these lots absent significant public subsidy for which there is no evidence
of any occurring in this neighborhood. On Viola Street, nine other existing structures are in
multifamily use, with lots that are a fraction of the size of the subject proposal, even
proportionally speaking. To the north on Parkside Avenue, which abuts the property to the rear,
the density increases even further to anywhere between two units and up to 49 units, which is
of course the proposal that is intended to adjoin this one. Further to this point, and with complete
respect to the councilwoman's informed position on this project, even her letter acknowledges the
multifamily context of Viola Street. Furthermore, as is shown on the historic maps at Exhibit 19,
and again these maps derive from the city's open map system, these properties sit just outside of
boundary of the Parkside Historic District, which you can see outlined here in black.
They are, as a result, and before I get to that point, you can see in addition to that,
these are properties that are individually designated on top of the district itself.
As a result, these properties before the board today are uniquely situated
and of disparate character than the remaining block, which was intended to be preserved
and developed in a single-family fashion that would be consistent in character with the
historic district and the historic properties that exist on the block, none of which existed
on these lots. This combination of factors establishes it would be a hardship to use
this property in compliance with its single-family use. Likewise, as I noted earlier, the CMX2 portion
was supposed to terminate either within or just before this property. It's very unclear based on
the maps. In light of the boundaries of the historic district, it's not unreasonable to
surmise that planning principles should have encouraged the continuation of the CMX2 or RM1
zoning slightly further down the block to avoid the creation of a few disparate parcels that are
fundamentally different than its surroundings. The evidence presented concerning the use and
character of adjacent and surrounding land is unquestionably relevant to a determination of
hardship, as the Pennsylvania Supreme Court has clearly stated in the Pivotal Valley View case
referenced at 462 A to D 1983. We submit that the number of proposed units is also the least
minimum. There are no dimensional refusals associated with this request, and this proposal
is quite modest, dimensionally speaking, in terms of what can be built on this lot.
By comparison, the proposed density is nearly identical to that which would be consistent with
the allowances of the RM1 zoning district by utilizing a variety of different bonus structures.
by utilizing a variety of different bonus structures.
Objection again.
Objection again.
As I previously described, the density is further consistent with the density of the multifamily uses of surrounding structures based on the lot size of this particular lot.
The structure itself also dictates the number of units.
Given the diverse uses on this block and further considering the commercial use history of the property, it is the least deviation from the code to propose a use that is most consistent with the character of the block.
There is no evidence that new single-family development is viable on this street, particularly not any new single-family development that would be consistent with the historic character of the other structures on this block that were built in the 1800s.
Compatibility with surrounding uses has been embraced by the Commonwealth Court as evidence of satisfaction of the Philadelphia Code's least minimum standard by showing that of all of the viable alternatives, the proposed use is most similar to uses in the surrounding neighborhood.
The board can refer to Inre Garcia, which was decided by the Commonwealth Court in 2022.
Contrary to the opponent's assertion that this proposal violates the intent of the Viola Street Project Reclaim Plan, the applicant would submit that the plan expressly states a goal to, quote,
maintain affordable housing for low and moderate income residents in a location on the cusp of
revitalization. Despite the fact that the applicant cannot formally rely on the bonuses provided by
the code, the applicant has preemptively recorded a declaration of covenants, not just guaranteeing
the 10% affordable that would have been required with the bonus, but adding an additional 15%
so that 25 percent of the units are reserved as affordable. That recorded declaration is shown
at Exhibit 20. Furthermore, page 45 of the opposition exhibits include a map showing
neighborhood opportunities for investment. The prior blighted structure on 4285 Viola
is noted as an existing building in need of significant investment, further supporting
the case before the board today that a mere single-family development would not be sufficient
to support the level of investment needed on this lot. The proposal will not increase congestion.
Although parking is not a requirement, the applicant submits it would be extremely challenging
to provide parking for this development as a result of the property's location mid-block
with no other access points other than Viola Street. There are no residential uses on this
Street with any off-street parking. Furthermore, public transit abounds this neighborhood with bus
stops at every corner. In addition, in response to the opponent's assertion that the project will
cause overcrowding on Viola Street, the evidence has shown that this project is not intended and
has been designed to be oriented in a way that encourages significant pedestrian traffic
that discourages significant pedestrian traffic to or from Viola Street and instead directs it
towards Parkside Avenue, where the buy-write larger project has already been approved.
The proposal will not impair light and air, as again, it's designed to be underbuilt given the
dimensional allowances of the lot. The board saw that this design includes significant open space
for residents and by creating side yards around the building actually i'll bring up the zoning
plan back up by creating side yards around the building through a detached building these units
will have far more windows and light and air than would be typical for a development of this type
finally to be entirely candid to this board there is a dual application for this lot pending
that is not scheduled to be reviewed by the board until March.
That application proposes an identical structure, but a different use as group living.
We do not intend to discuss that particular proposal today, as it requires its own independent
However, that application only requires a special exception.
Either a multifamily use or a group living use would complement the applicant's new
development next door. The applicant presented both proposals to the community, and there was
a clear difference of opinion among those in the meeting, many who felt strongly that a traditional
that a traditional multifamily would be a preference over group living. Despite significant
multifamily would be a preference over group living.
efforts to reconvene and further discuss the proposals, none of the efforts panned out.
The applicant submits the proposal and the requested variance complies in full with the
requirements of Code Section 3038E.2. Full analysis is provided in the Memorandum of Law at Exhibit 15.
Before I bring up my client, I would respectfully note the applicant's strong objection to the board's consideration of Mr. Master's documentary evidence or their inclusion into the record, given that he submitted them to the board and myself at 11.38 this morning in violation of the board's express and written policy that opposition exhibits should be submitted a minimum of 48 hours in advance of a hearing.
Given that an applicant's case would be continued if they fail to comply with the board's written mandates, opponents should be held to the same standard, and this board should reject the consideration of their written exhibits as a result.
At this point, I would ask to locate German Yakubov in the audience to have him sworn in.
Mr. Hand, can we find him in the audience?
Yes, he will be rejoining as a panel shortly, Mr. Chair.
Thank you.
Good morning or afternoon.
Good afternoon, sir.
Can you please state your name and spell it for the court reporter?
German Yakubov, G-E-R-M-A-N, Y-A-K-U-B-O-V.
You swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
I do so swear.
Please proceed, counsel.
Thank you, German.
Very briefly, broadly speaking, how long have you been developing in West Philadelphia
And just roughly, how many collective dwelling units have you built?
Sure. So we've been developing in West Philadelphia for about 17 years.
And we've built over those 17 years about 500 to 600 units.
And what about in the Parkside neighborhood specifically?
Sure. In the Parkside neighborhood, we started developing in about 2013, so about 12 years ago.
And we have developed about a number of units, probably 50.
And then we have another 150 that we got permits for that we intend to build in the next year.
To get right to the point, in your experience as a developer, particularly based on your 12-year knowledge of this neighborhood,
do you believe that building one or more single family homes on this lot is viable and why or why
not sure so in the last 12 years um there have been no single family homes built in in east
parkside um i i think that the last time a new home was built in east parkside was probably 50
years ago if not before that um i'm objecting that there's no he said probably so he's guessing
and you can't speculate it has to be a real knowledge for him to testify about okay there
have been no new homes built in the last 50 years in this neighborhood whatsoever um and
no single family homes so that comes that is because several reasons um but it's more
it's really clearly evidenced by um three parcels right around the corner here on 42nd street um
they were owned by the same person or are owned by the same person or group.
They got permits for two six-unit buildings that they were able to build.
And then when they went to get a variance for the third parcel for six units,
I'm going to object that this isn't relevant, or what's the relevance to what they wanted to do.
What they wanted to do.
Jerm, hold on one second.
One second.
uh so can you can we at least get him to testify on your testimony and you know try to keep his
comments you know tight as possible because we do have to do across and we have additional
individuals that want to testify i understood and and i believe that the testimony that german
is attempting to give and i'll ask german to to just sum it up but i believe that his testimony
here is is looking to establish that even lower density multi-family is difficult in this
neighborhood let alone single family so uh german again based based on your knowledge of of the
development that you're speaking of how does that establish that single family cannot be built on
these lots i'm objecting that that's a leading question and there's no there's no foundation
that he has any knowledge whatsoever he's just testified that he builds things that doesn't mean
that he knows things respectfully he he testified that he has been uh
Respectfully, he testified that he has been developing in this neighborhood for 12 years. And as a developer in a fairly small boundary, it is not unreasonable that a developer would be quite familiar with other developments being built in that exact same neighborhood.
it's possible i would imagine that that could be true but it would also be true that if he's
building in homes for so many years then he should know how to he should figure out how to get along
with the community and to build things that are in concert with let's get back to council please
proceed sure so so the community approved two six unit buildings that were built because that was
the least amount that made financial sense to build. When that developer went for another
variance for the six units next door, the neighborhood pushed back and wanted him to
only build four. So he got a variance for four units. Then he realized he couldn't build them.
So he tried listing that property for sale. And that property still has not sold because nobody
can go in there, buy plans to build four units to build it at what costs to build today.
So, German, just again, based on what it would cost to build a single family home on this lot, or if the lot was subdivided to create smaller lots, based on what it would cost to build, can you economically support the construction of a single family home on these lots or any combination of lots here?
no and and it's evidenced by lack of any new single family homes being built in this neighborhood
for at least 50 years or a duplex or a triplex um you just there's none that have been built
in this time and again just in terms of the design of of this particular proposal
this is intended to be an offshoot of your development on Parkside is that correct
it is and I'm fully sympathetic to the community's needs in wanting to dissuade people from
walking down a admittedly smaller street than Parkside um to to be able to um sorry
to do that so what we did was we we put the entrance on the side of the building and we
made it so it's much easier to access it from Parkside Avenue, and that would be the main
entrance. The trash comes out to Biola Street down a small ramp on a side of a street where
parking does not exist, so it does not take away from any parking spots. It is just as tall as
the buildings surround it. It has got way more open area than the buildings around it.
We've taken great consideration to take in our years of dealing with the community and their concerns into the design of this building.
And just very briefly, how do you come to 16 units versus some other number of units for this building?
sure so it for the number of lots that that this is for what it cost us to purchase those lots
and what it costs to build a building like this 16 units is the least amount that we could do
and again it's evidenced by um the fact that we only need to you know this barely works and
one of the reasons it works is because we only need to run one water line one sewer line one
sprinkler line. If this were three different buildings, we would have three times as many
costs for those same exact things. That's why those buildings are on the corner, even though
collectively they are 16 units, only two of them were able to be built because the cost of running
new utilities to each individual structure is now multiplied by three.
Thank you. I'll ask Sherman to adopt my testimony. I'm sure that Steve has cross-examination, but
i think i should probably have him adopt my testimony before we get to that so uh german
have you heard all of the testimony and evidence that was offered in front of the board today
do you adopt that test do you agree that testimony was true and accurate and would you adopt that
testimony uh as if you hadn't given it yourself for where you did not give it yourself yes is
there anything else you want to add before mr masters uh takes over some cross-examination
no thank you thank you counsel mr masters and and steve if you wouldn't mind please speak into
the microphone it is a little hard to hear okay yeah i'm i'm not used to having to put the
microphone so close i should i should do karaoke more i guess um meredith can you stop sharing no
Sure. All right. Um, Mr. Um,
all right um mr um yakubov is it true that the we're talking about three parcels that were
consolidated into one larger parcel yep and it's true that you're the one who consolidated them
correct correct okay at the time that you bought these three parcels were you aware that they were
zoned for single family i was excuse me i was i am you were okay and did you understand that if
you consolidated three lots into one that the that would mean that only one single family house could
be built on the entire plot on the entire um large consolidated lot or a group living facility
if if you were going to be doing single family it's zoned for single family correct
Correct. And group living. It's group living with a special exception,
but I'm talking about by right. Yeah, by right, group living. I mean,
my understanding is special exemption is pretty close to by right.
Okay. This isn't going to go so easily. If you keep arguing, we need to be back. I'm trying to
ask you a question very simply and have an answer. Well, you're leading me to believe
that the single family house is the only thing that could be built on the slot. And I reject that
assertion. I don't believe that that's the only thing that could be built on the lot,
But I'm telling you, but I'm asking you to confirm that by consolidating three lots into one, you, you, you have, you, you brought yourself into a situation where in terms of single family, you could only put one single family home on all three lots that are consolidated instead of three separate single family homes if you kept them separate lots.
That's correct, right?
So at this point, your minimum variance, you basically made it three times harder to meet your minimum variance by consolidating this lot, knowing that it wasn't RM1, knowing that it was single family only.
No, because we proposed a special exemption use for a group living facility that this size lot would accommodate.
That's coming next month.
I don't think we can talk about things that are coming next month today, unless you want to withdraw your application for multifamily.
No, not at all.
Okay, well then we're going to have to talk about multifamily today and we can talk about group living next month.
Okay, so you said something interesting towards the end of your testimony with your council.
You said that you have a history of dealing with the community?
Okay. And the word dealing struck me as concerning because many people would describe their interactions with the community as working with the community, collaborating with the community, coming up with strategies or compromises together with the community.
Dealing with the community, is that the word that you want to stick with?
you had a several meetings with the community about this project is that correct
i had one meeting and they did not show up for the second meeting
are you aware of conversations that have happened between myself and your attorney
yes but we've only had one community meeting okay and at that community meeting uh did the
community present to you what they what they thought would be a fair amount of development
on this property and i respectfully disagreed with what their assertion of fair was
well i'm asking you what they said they want that they would agree to well they didn't say
whether you agree they wanted less units they wanted nine or twelve or some other number than
16. Okay. And that's not single family, correct? That's not single family. Right. And your
testimony today was you can't go anything below 16. My testimony was that my neighbor around the
corner went and did the same thing. He wanted to accommodate the community and this isn't going
to work. And I'm asking you what your testimony was today about your property, not your neighbor,
not to other developers you said you can't go below 16 isn't that correct that's correct
and economics dictates that just like it did around the corner for a developer that tried
to go down that same path by by trying to do what the community wanted him to do and now he's stuck
with a property excuse me excuse me if we can answer council's questions we want to try to get
as much testimony on record before we have to do a resumption um so we could try to keep the
before we have to do a resumption um so we could try to keep the responses short but accurate
The response is short.
please understood chair uh mr yakubov i can't find your pro formas in your exhibit binder can
you show me what exhibit you are revealing all of your pro formas to so that we can understand
how you could arrive at a minimum of 16 and nothing below that i'll let my attorney answer
No, your attorney doesn't answer cross-examination. Do you have pro formas in your exhibit binder that you've shared with the board today to document any basis for your surprising and unsupported conjecture that you have to have 16 units of this property?
I'm going to object to that question. I believe that this applicant has established himself as an established developer, and there is no requirement for a developer to release their pro formas publicly.
He is fully capable of testifying to what costs would be and what his expectation would be based on his 17 years of development experience in West Philadelphia without having to present highly private data.
there are just for for the boards um for the board's knowledge um there are there are court
cases that have specifically held that the the mirror conjecture of a developer without any
actual details as to what the costs are is not sufficient to justify and to support a minimum
variance um proof um on the on the part of a developer um i don't have any more questions
can you provide a citation to the board for that assertion i will provide that i don't have it right
in front of me okay that's it i have no further questions yeah okay so we we did um spend quite
a bit of time on this we're going to actually move this over to a resumption hearing um we're
going to schedule that for april the 2nd at 2 p.m i'm sorry uh you said the second april april the
second at 2 p.m. Thank you. Understood. Can I just confirm, Ms. Ferlinger, you have completed
your presentation at this time? As long as, yes, but I would reserve the right to bring Mr. Yakubov
back on as to offer any form of rebuttal testimony based on any testimony that the community has
offered. That's understood. I just wanted to, so next time we will start with Mr. Master giving
his presentation thank you i would just request that um that mr yakubov not be allowed to provide
proformas or any more or any tangible details that he didn't choose to provide to the board
at this at when they um before they rested um i think that that would be prejudicial
to the objectors and we would then need more time in order to rebut any kind of proforma that he
would provide you got your exhibits two hours before the hearing so the record is because
we're going to a resumption hearing the record is open any parties can submit documents to the board
and any other parties can object if they do not believe those documents should be considered by
the board thank you but it should be it should be submitted within 40 hours before the next hearing
Yes. Yes. Yes. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.
Thank you.
Yeah. So we're going to go back to number five, hopefully.
Mr. Goodman is available.
MI-2024-006099
9, 42, 10, Peasdale Street.
Mr. Goodman.
You should be back in shortly, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Mr. Hand.
yes we can hear you now
we can hear you
please state your name and spell it for the court report
William Goodman
you swear to tell the truth
the whole truth and nothing but the truth
our board member mrs graham has a few questions for you sure good afternoon have you emailed
all the required documents and exhibits needed to proceed with this case five days prior to
this hearing yes good and do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to us
Good. And do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
accurate
Board member Graham, actually, because this is a pro se matter, I'll read the refusal into the record.
Gotcha. Thank you.
This application is for the erection of an accessory agricultural structure, greenhouse, in the front yard of an existing attached structure.
Permanent and temporary structures are not permitted in the required front yard.
You can proceed, Mr. Goodman.
If you can, you know, pull up your presentation.
Well, basically, I want to put up a greenhouse so I can extend my growing season.
We need you to pull up your presentation so you can walk us through the documents.
Oh, snap.
I'm not on my home computer.
No, that's okay.
We can give us a second.
All right.
Hold on one second.
Pull up your presentation.
because you have your email open
right here.
This is your email.
And you
have, you emailed
it to me, right?
Yeah, I think I did.
Yeah, right.
So it's,
where is it? This one?
I think so.
Image.
Where is it?
Okay. Where's the one that you sent to me? This one?
Mr. Goodman, do you need a little bit more time? We are pressed for time with many cases here,
so would you like us to come back to you in a few more minutes?
Yeah, a few minutes. Sure. We're going to move on to the next case.
you send it to me I have my email
I'm going to do the other resumption.
mi-2024-003086 7330 ridge avenue catherine missimer is the attorney
excuse me mr chair i believe we were going sorry i believe we're going number
14 next and then coming to number two. I'm sorry.
So, I'm going to recuse myself from this one and this is Commissioner Graham is going to lead this.
Okay, thank you. Okay, so MI2024006920, 648 to 50 North 40th Street. Meredith Froelicher is the attorney.
Ms. Graham, she will be coming back in as a panelist shortly.
Good afternoon.
Okay. Can you hear us? Meredith, can you hear us?
I can hear you. Can you hear me?
Yep. Gotcha. All right. So I think you've already been sworn in.
Okay. This is for the erection of semi-detached structure with roof deck.
With access structures, we have a letter of opposition from the Belmont Alliance Civic Association, as well as a letter of opposition from the West Belmont Civic Association, with a letter of support from Councilmember Garter's office.
I'm going to. Yep. Could you identify your client for me?
Sure. Meredith Ferliger, again, F-E-R-L-E-G-E-R. My client today for this proposal is 41 Development LLC, which is the owner of the property. And the representatives on the call today are Eugene Nadevich and Robert Sherman.
Sure. Meredith Ferliger, again, F-E-R-L-E-G-E-R.
Okay. Thank you. And have you emailed all the required documents and exhibits needed to proceed with this case five days prior to this hearing?
I did, yes.
And do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Thank you.
Wonderful.
Good afternoon again, members of the board.
The request before the board today concerns 648 North 40th Street.
And I have to say, I think you're going to find this to be one of the oddest cases that you've heard in quite a while.
You have an exhibit packet that contains 17 exhibits, which we do request be moved into evidence at the conclusion of the presentation today.
To summarize the basis for today's request, this application represents the often significant disconnect between affordable housing funding sources and the structure of the zoning code.
To be very clear, this proposal can be built entirely by right, as I will explain, if it were not for the requirements imposed by the funding sources that are required to make this project 100% affordable for seniors over the age of 62.
With that background in mind, let me orient you first to the location of the property.
The deed and tax clearance are included in the exhibits at 2 and 3.
As you can see on the aerials at Exhibit 9, sorry, actually Exhibit 10,
this property sits on North 40th Street that has frontage on Fairmont Avenue,
Wyota Street, and again North 40th Street to the east of this orientation.
This aerial is slightly out of date as there is new construction immediately next door
that you'll see in later photographs. At the zoning map at Exhibit 9, you'll notice that the
property is zoned RM1 and is surrounded on three sides by similar RM1 and CMX2 zoning.
The photographs at Exhibit 17 are coming up now.
You'll see the vacant corner lot, which is currently being used for staging of construction equipment for that new construction I referenced immediately next door.
The photographs also show the timely posting of the zoning posters on all three frontages.
Otherwise, you'll notice that this is a sizable lot over 5,000 square feet.
This first view is looking from North 40th Street back to Wyota Street.
The next view here looks from Wyota Street towards North 40th Street.
I've also included some older photographs as well, including from the corner of North 40th
and Fairmont Avenue, again looking towards the property.
This older photograph here is on Fairmont Avenue, and this is Wyota Street intersection.
and this is again an older photograph looking from 40th Street
and again from Fairmount Avenue. The proposal for 648 North 40th Street is shown on the zoning
plan at Exhibit 7 and includes one new four-story structure. The building will contain 24 dwelling
units. The roof deck is for mechanical access only. There is no basement. As you can see here,
the building is set back along the 40th Street frontage. If I turn momentarily to an earlier
version of the plan that was submitted to L&I about a year ago, you'll see that the building
was originally designed to front on 40th Street with a setback along Wyota Street. However, in
response to discussions with planning at the time, you'll see the line they indicated would be the
preferred setback, and you can see that dotted line here. Also on this plan, I'd ask the board
to take note that the original lot square footage, I'll bring it up here, the original lot square
footage was 5,243 square feet, which is also the lot square footage on record with the OPA.
Planning also had noticed at the time of the preliminary review a discrepancy in the lot
dimensions, which were resolved via the recording of a corrective deed, which is included at Exhibit
3. On the current zoning plan at Exhibit 7, you'll see that that revision to the lot area dropped the
lot to 5,196 square feet, which is ultimately where the dimensional variance derives from.
which is ultimately where the dimensional variance derives from.
Now, even though I've...
Now, even though I've shown you an older plan and a current plan,
the current plan that is before you is the one that actually generated the refusal,
so there's no need for any form of revised plan or revised plan proviso form.
We simply filed a new application to avoid the discrepancy.
This property is zoned RM1 and sits within the MIN mandatory affordable housing overlay.
Per that overlay, 20% of the units are to be reserved at 40% AMI.
Pursuant to the MIN density calculations, this lot is eligible for a base number of units of 17 units.
With a mixed income housing bonus, this lot is eligible for an additional 50%, or 25 total units.
I'll explain momentarily why that is not possible to use in this case.
Floor plans are shown on Exhibit 8.
Pursuant to the PHFA-approved plans, there are 12 one-bedroom units and 12 two-bedroom units.
Those units, including the overall number, are designed to comply specifically with PHFA requirements for unit size and layout.
As I mentioned, this project has already received a conditional award of funds under the Pennsylvania Housing Affordability and Rehabilitation Enhancement Fund, or commonly known as FAIR.
In addition to that, this project has also been selected as a FAIR cloth to RAD transaction, receiving an award of a project-based voucher subsidy.
Again, this award is also specifically linked to 24 units.
Documentation of both of those awards is included in your packet at Exhibit 18. We wanted to ensure
that you could see that what we are testifying to today has actually already been granted.
Based on these funding sources, 20% of the units will be fully ADA wheelchair accessible
as there is an elevator in the building, as you can see on the floor plans.
10% of the units will be reserved at 20% AMI, 20% of the units will be reserved at 40% AMI,
20% will be at 50% AMI, and 50% will be at 60% AMI. My clients are here today and can answer
any questions you have about these funding sources specifically. Now, regarding the refusal,
I'll start first with the dimensional refusal, which is extremely minor. As I pointed out earlier,
this resulted from an unfortunate lot line discrepancy that planning was quite adept at
noticing. On the original plan that was filed with L&I, you saw that the open area was 20%,
and I'll show you that here, the open area was 20% and was fully compliant with the zoning code.
As a result of the meets and balance discrepancy and the lot square footage dropping slightly,
the open area went from 20% down to 18.04%. The building itself did not change,
and this is truly a de minimis dimensional variance stemming from an unfortunate discrepancy
in the meets and bounds description. Next, the applicant also received a refusal for the proposed
density. The refusal notes that 17 units are allowed where 24 units are proposed. However,
as I alluded to earlier, this law is eligible for a total of 25 units with the mixed income
housing bonus. So why, you might be asking yourself, can the applicant not use the mixed
income housing bonus if the project is intended to be a deed-restricted affordable housing project
regardless? Allow me to show you why. The City of Philadelphia Division of Housing and Community
Development, or DHCD, put out an RFP to solicit proposals to finance the development of rental
units designed to serve low- and moderate-income households from a variety of city funding sources.
This RFP is intended to provide gap funding for projects seeking or those that have already
received some form of PHFA funding, which of course, as I pointed out earlier, this project
already has. If I scroll down, you will see quite clearly where the problem comes in.
Stated in bold on the RFP, DHCD states that, quote, the development of affordable units for
which a developer is receiving a density bonus under the mixed income portion of the zoning code
under the mixed income portion of the zoning code is not eligible for financing under this RFP.
is not eligible for financing.
Of course, 24 units is a crucial number in terms of eligibility for both the fair
and the project-based awards, but yet getting to the 24 number by right will then disqualify
the project under DHCD's guidelines. Given the importance of encouraging projects such as this
one that will not only provide deed-restricted affordable housing, but will do so for seniors
over 62 that predominantly come directly from this community. This refusal represents a clear
hardship, as strict conformity with the zoning code would prevent development of this important
project that directly serves the goals of the current administration. We submit the proposed
units is the least minimum as the density proposed is actually allowed for this lot and is technically
one unit less than would be allowed under the provisions of the zoning code. The dimensional
variance is quite minor and resulted from a technical error in the lot dimensions that had
unfortunately gone unnoticed until the filing of the original application. With regard to the
community, we are candidly quite baffled by the positions that have been taken here.
We quite clearly illustrated during the meetings that an identical proposal can be built
by right on this lot with a fraction of the affordability that this project proposes.
Furthermore, at the very least, the West Belmont community previously issued a letter of support
for funding purposes, again, referencing the 24 units. And this letter was back in 2023 for
funding purposes. The project has not changed since then. So again, we remain, quite frankly,
perplexed, given that this project represents the epitome of not only the current mayoral
administration goals, but also espouses the goals expressed by nearly every community across the
city. We submit the proposal will not increase congestion, harm neighbors' properties, or impair
light and air. The proposal is consistent in massing to surrounding new construction and
intended to facilitate the retention of seniors in their current community. More detailed analysis
is provided in the memo of law submitted to the board at Exhibit 14, and I'm happy to touch on
any point in more detail. At this point, I would ask the administrator to unmute either Eugene
Nadevich or Robert Sherman, whoever is available.
I've got Robert Sherman.
They should be coming back in as a panel shortly.
Thank you.
You're welcome.
Hello.
good afternoon good afternoon can you state your name and spell it for the sonographer please
robert sherman r-o-b-e-r-t sherman is s-h-e-r-m-a-n okay do you swear to tell the truth
nothing but the truth i do thank you uh robert you are a member of the ownership entity of this
property 41 development llc correct yes and have you heard all the testimony and evidence that was
offered in front of the board today i have would you agree that testimony was true and accurate
and would you adopt it as if it were your own yes thank you we're happy to answer any questions on
this okay thank you questions from the board um yes i'm just trying to confirm right now you have
both FAIR and you have
PHA vouchers under
a future HAP contract
to support the
whole development?
That's exactly correct. And then who's
going to be the property manager once
the development's complete?
It'll be
Fittler Properties.
And does Fittler
Properties have previous experience
working with both this population
and these affordable
housing finance
mechanisms yes um i have a question was there any parking uh with this project there is no parking
for the project and it's also not required of course as you know but no there is no no parking
proposed what was the uh community's opposition board member johns i i don't know that i could
articulate that clearly there was there was some concern over the the density which we really truly
did not understand uh again not only just because of the fact that the density is allowed for this
is allowed for this lot, but there was seemingly some confusion over what they believed to be
lot but there was seemingly some confusion over
an 18-unit proposal versus a 24-unit proposal. But candidly, we really left the meeting quite
perplexed, and I'm not sure that I could articulate what the concern was in light of
the circumstances here. I don't think I saw the elevations. Oh, sure.
that they're not they're they're two-dimensional that were included on the zoning plan you can see
here there's the section yeah i don't i don't see like an elevation so trying to figure out context
as it relates to the the block and the rest of the
sure so i we don't have a detailed elevation but as you can see here there's
proposal immediately next door that's under construction as you can see in the photograph
here it is in terms of massing it is very similar to what is being built next door
um well it's kind of hard kind of hard to see from this picture because all we're seeing is a
blue wall okay i understood and apologies i don't know you know it yeah i mean
the the dimensions do comply with the code certainly uh that doesn't directly address
your question but um but in terms of of massing it is it is consistent with what is on the block
currently particularly immediately next door kind of hard to to to what's the height is there
identified height. The height of this building is going to be 45 feet. 45 feet. So it's four
stories, 45 feet. Correct. And your development team submitted for FAR funding, then they would
have had to submit elevations for this project. So that should have been included, you know,
just so we could see our rendering or something that really kind of shows the context. So
that's disappointing um is it 45 feet to the top of the roof deck or to the top of the pilot house
it is to the um it is not to the top of the pilot house it's to the top of the roof
is it to the top of the roof deck or that because you're pointing to the parapet can
need scrolls to the right. No, it's the top of the roof. The roof is on it. It has a pitch to it.
Yep, I see it now. Yep. So it's like to the top of the roof.
Any other questions from the board? Questions from attorney Hillary Emerson?
Just briefly, Ms. Ferlinger, I wanted to clarify, you mentioned there was a change in the plans as
a result of the deeds, the meets and bounds being incorrectly laid out. Was there a corrected or
amended refusal issued because of that? No, Council Emerson, that original plan was actually
filed under an entirely separate zoning application. As a result of the discrepancies
that were discovered and the process that we had to go through to make sure that was corrected,
we withdrew that application entirely and when it was corrected we refiled so there is no there's
no corrected refusal there's no revised plan in terms of this application itself because the
zoning plan that's in front of the board is the one that generated this refusal okay if that's
clear much yeah no no problem sorry that's okay we have any questions from our audience
Yes, Ms. Graham, I'm sorry to interrupt you, but we have a hand up in the virtual audience
by Park Frost.
I've allowed them to speak.
Hello, thank you.
Hi, could you state your name and spell it for the stenographer?
Park Frost, P-A-R-K-F-R-O-S-T.
And do you swear to tell the truth?
Okay, proceed.
Thank you. I live on this block directly, almost almost directly across the street from this block. I am the block captain of this block. I have been a resident of this block for 24 years.
um i attend all of our rco meetings um and you know know many of the attendees of the rco meetings
including all of my neighbors in the immediate vicinity um the situation is not being accurately
represented um obviously uh with with good reason you cannot rely on the lawyer of the opposition to
With good reason, you cannot rely on the lawyer of the opposition to present your case for you.
Our RCOs, I understand, have written clear letters as to why we have rejected this.
Basically, the context is that all of the other multi-unit buildings on our block and on the next blocks and on the neighboring blocks are around three to eight units max.
This is far larger than anything in the area, far more units than anything. It's far more dense than anything nearby. As was noted, there is a construction going up on an identical lot next door, you know, identical lot, same size.
they are placing 10 units on it, and it is affordable housing. The setbacks on this side
of the street are much deeper than what they are providing. They are building to all other
lot lines, as my understanding. This is much larger than anything else on the block. All
other buildings on the block have considerable front setbacks, backyards and side yards.
This does not fit the scale of our neighborhood. It does not fit the density of our neighborhood.
And our neighborhood did not approve ever anything this large. We approved what we all seem to remember, and this has never been addressed by this lawyer. We attended a meeting where they presented a request for 18 units.
we have we approved that and we wrote a letter of support for that and that is why the rco that
wrote a previous letter of support has now written a letter of non-support because we do not approve
something this large it's far too large for the context okay thank you thank you for your testimony
anyone else in the virtual audience
um yes i have a hand up from trevian ambrose i've allowed them to uh speak
oh wait they just put their hand in i'm sorry
oh okay now to put it back up i allowed them to speak
hello can you hear me good afternoon could you uh state your name and spell it for the stenographer
please. Yes, Chair. Travian Ambrose, T-R-E-V-I-A-N-A-M-B-R-O-I-S-E. And do you
speak to the truth? I do. Okay, proceed with your testimony. Thank you, Chair. Again, my name is
Travian Ambrose and I'm representing the Office of Councilmember Gaudier. I'm here again to convey
the Councilmember's opinion on this matter as one of full support. It is the Councilmember's
opinion that the proposed 24-unit 100% affordable would reflect what it looks like when funding or
financing partners to build for genuine affordability, in this case for seniors. The
office acknowledges the concerns of constituents. It is our understanding that this exact proposal
was discussed with community in 2023 as part of DHCD's affordable rental housing RFP process
and received a letter of support. It is the council member's view that bureaucratic
incompatibilities in the code and the city's RFP process
should not stifle, derail, or stall the creation of new,
deeply 100% affordable housing, senior affordable
housing, especially given the current uncertainty surrounding future
federal funds. The Councilmember reaffirms her urge that the ZBA
grant the requested variance without delay. Thank you.
Thank you for your testimony. Anyone else in the virtual audience?
No, it's okay. Planning Commission. Okay. Oh, the attorney would like to respond to any
other testimony thus far.
No, I mean, not not to be repetitive. But again, you know, just in terms of the density.
Somebody could come into this lot and build a much larger development, and it would be far less
affordable so we believe that the the application uh you know stood on its own to establish why
why this proposal is warranting of relief and certainly we understand the concerns for density
but in this particular case the density proposed is contemplated for this lot one way or another
okay thank you uh planning commission thank you good afternoon chair and members of the
board michael gall with the philadelphia city planning commission okay uh do you say that your
name already could you spell it for the record m-i-c-h-a-e-l-g-a-l-l and you swear to tell the
truth in your testimony so affirm okay position the comprehensive plan recommends no change to
the rm1 residential multifamily zoning at this location for the additional dwelling units beyond
for the additional dwelling units beyond 17 the appellant could earn eight additional
17 the appellant could earn eight additional dwell
dwelling units if they were to apply for the mixed income housing bonus the city planning commission
provided a planned consistency letter to support funding for this project therefore the city
planning commission recommends that the board grant the requested variances for unit count
and maximum occupied lot area oh thank you um i think uh you guys want to take this uh back to
executive session um can we uh vote on it for next week at 2 p.m okay all right next week at 2 p.m
thank you thank you
okay moving on to the next one i just want to just make an announcement real quick uh mi dash
for continuance mi-2024-005-841-4010 palmetto street we want to continue that and a date will
be provided to you i was gonna say that we're actually continue that attorney moving party
so yes continued attorney moving party yes we'll provide a date um when it will be when the attorney
reaches out yes thank you all right
and moving on
to number four
MI-2024-006066
1921 West Norris Street
Daniel
you want to go back to it
okay are we going to go back
and get this last one out the way
MI-2024-00380867030 Ridge Avenue.
Kristen Mister is the attorney.
And I believe we also have Pamela Loughran here
on behalf of the Protestants for that case as well.
I don't think she's here in the room.
She may be virtual.
is Pam Longman
on the virtual audience.
Can we promote her?
Catherine,
can you please state your name and spell it
for the court reporter, please?
Please keep turning.
Catherine Mithimer,
it's M-I-S-S-I-M-E-R,
Claire Harrison,
1835 Market Street, Suite 1400,
19103.
Thank you.
Do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
And has Pam been promoted?
Pam, can you please state your name for the record?
Yes, Pamela M. Lachman.
And can you spell that for the court reporter, please?
L-O-U-G-H-M-A-N.
Do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
this is a resumption hearing so we can get started um chris and katherine we'll start with you
and and mr try i believe that the only thing the app has to present is the updated landscaping
plan that was requested by the planning commission and then we were going to take public testimony
and the recommendation of the planning commission yes and i'll just ask that my architect step
forward so that he can testify to the changes made on the landscape plan okay fair enough please proceed
rustin did you want to put your name on the record rustin oler r-u-s-t-i-n-o-h-l-e-r
harman deutsch oler architecture we swear to the truth the whole truth but nothing but the truth
i do thank you it's all you counsel thank you russian can you speak to the changes made
with respect to pcpc comment on the landscape plan we'll pull that up so it's easier for you to see
sure um so city planning had requested a further review of the landscaping plan
um overall there were no comprehensive changes to the entire plan at all or any of the landscape
buffers it was just a clarification on some planting and species so the plan as was previously
presented from a zoning standpoint to the zoning board has not changed minor changes in delineation
of plantings and that's it and a note i believe was added to clarify that the buffer was with
respect to um the zoning district adjacent correct correct and there were no other changes made on
the landscape plan understood uh pam um yes i just have one or two for mr oler um mr roller um the
The landscape plan proposes greenery and shrubbery along the.
um proposes uh greenery and shrubbery along the the rear lot line parallel to ridge avenue correct
correct yeah and so uh that greenery and shrubbery would prevent any light from cars
um i'm sorry and it's in front of a fence isn't a proposed fence is that correct yeah we have a front
a fence around the entire perimeter a solid fence yes okay so the combination of the solid fence
and the proposed landscaping would prevent any um light from cars from bothering people who live
on uh the development behind the rear lot line i think it's called um
i can't remember the name of it right now rocksborough reserve yeah isn't that correct correct
Thank you.
Do we have any other questions from the board?
Question from the audience?
Any questions from the virtual audience?
Mr. H, who was A? Mr. A, are you available?
There, now I'm available. Can you hear me?
There you go, yes.
I input video.
Lou Egger, that's who it is.
Please state your name and spell it for the court reporter.
My name is Louis Ager, L-O-U-I-S-A-G-R-E.
I am the head of the 21st Ward Democrats RCO and also a neighborhood resident.
I have I had a couple issues.
The whole truth and nothing but the truth.
Please proceed.
A couple of things.
One is when we had the first meeting, I asked the attorney for the developer.
to tell me who was going to be doing the work because there's a lot of runoff there and people's
houses have been getting flooded with dirt and other things and I want to make sure that the
people doing the work are responsible and responsive to the community and not going to just
make get 20 calls from people whose basements are filling up with dirt as has happened on
other developments in that area on Ridge and Henry Avenue because it's on a slope. Number two is that
But the way the the plans are now, it's going to be very dangerous when trucks are in there and they have to turn around because there's no place for them to turn around.
They're going to be backing into Ridge Avenue. And if you ever been on Ridge Avenue with all the new construction, traffic is very, very bad and it's very unsafe.
So we the 21st Ward RCO is is of the position that there should be some either make it a cul-de-sac or something else so that trucks can exit, you know, safely and also that the work is going to be done.
And so the neighbors below that are not flooded or are not covered with runoff, as has happened in numerous developments in that area.
Thank you, Mr. Egger. Anything else you want to add?
No, thank you very much, members of the board.
Thank you. Anyone else in a virtual audience?
so my name is valerie hallman i'm a resident of uh the dirley park area
for the court reporter please sure it's v-a-l-e-r-i-e and the last name is hallman
h-a-l-l-m-a-n i reside the whole you swear to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but
the truth yes i do please proceed okay um i've attended two of these prior zba meetings i've
looked over the plans several times my biggest concern actually i have two concerns but my first
concern in terms of detail is the width between the houses that is supposed to provide ingress
and egress to both the residents and to whatever emergency vehicles and to delivery vehicles
and the like.
I tried to do some research, and I do not claim to be an expert.
And I do not claim to be an expert, but it's my understanding that if you were to try and pull a 24-foot truck in there, which is probably the average length of a regular delivery truck, delivering appliances or moving truck,
because we're talking about a wheelbase of about 20 feet but a length of about 24 you would need
way more width on that egress to enable that truck to get out safely now what's been proposed
by the developer is that they if the truck can't turn around or do a three-point turn and somehow
get out front-wise, they're going to back into Ridge Avenue. Now, if you ask me, that is
foolhardy and very dangerous. It's not only dangerous to me as a neighbor, it's dangerous
to the residents of this complex, which is why the solution would be to create some sort of
turnaround cul-de-sac, which may mean they have to reduce the number of houses that they plan
to build here. I can tell you based on when you go on the web and you research what in the
trucking world is called a K-turn, that there is definitely not enough width. Is there enough width
for a passenger car, I thoroughly agree. There's enough width for a passenger car. Is there enough
width for a van? Well, it depends on how long the van is and what kind of turning radius it is
capable of. But I will say that with the 19 or 20 foot clearance, maybe a van can get in and out
without having to back off back into the ridge. But that will not be true of a garbage truck.
It will not be true of an emergency vehicle. It will not be true of a moving van. It will not be
true of anything that you can conceive that is larger. Now, that area of Ridge, highly traveled.
As a consequence, you're going to back up traffic from Domino Lane to Weigard Avenue as any large
truck tries to get in and out of that egress. At the same time, you're going to be endangering
pedestrians. And not just pedestrians on the side of the street where this development is planned,
but right across the street is the Ridge's YMCA. And you're going to have kids who go to school.
You have kids who go to school at Shawmont who walk down Ridge to get home. That's an elementary
school you have kids uh in the other direction it's going to be a mess without a cul-de-sac
um now if you want to test me on this please go to google where they talk about trucking and
trucking radiuses and passenger vehicle radiuses etc but it's my understanding that the rule of
thumb is you take the size of the truck, not just wheelbase to wheelbase, but the actual length of
the truck, and you multiply it by 2.5. Ms. Hellman, so are you in favor of the project or not in favor
of the project? No, I'm not in favor of the project unless they're willing to do a call this
out. And we need to move on, so thank you so much. Well, you do understand the concern. The second
point I would say is why are we poking holes into the established zoning plan which was voted on
by our representatives it seems that we try to find exception after exception and then once we
find an exception for one developer we lever that to find an exception for another developer
so that by the end of the day you have a zoning plan that has swiss cheese in the plan for your
comments, we have to move on. And we will mark that for the record that you are in opposition
of this project. Thank you. Moving on to the next one is going to be M. Oh, this, we're
going to. Oh, yeah, one more hand. Dorothy French, they have been allowed to speak, Mr.
Chair. Please state your name and spell it for the record. My name is Dorothy French,
F-R-E-N-C-H
Ms. French, do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Please proceed.
Yeah, I want to raise my objections to this plan as proposed.
raise my objections to this plan as proposed. It is too dense. The houses are too close together
and do not have the 25-foot separation that the code calls for. And, furthermore, the central
aisle, which does not have a cul-de-sac, is going to be a danger to pedestrians and traffic on Ridge
Avenue and to the general area. If there was a turnaround, like there is in Epiphany Place,
there's a nearby development at the rear of the ShopRite supermarket, that allows circulation to
turn around in a logical and safe way. And other developments nearby also have
cul-de-sacs. This is a fairly normal build for many developments. In fact, Roxburgh Reserve,
right behind this development, has two turnaround cul-de-sacs, which allows traffic to
safely turn around and then exit facing forward onto Ridge Avenue. So I submit that this is going
to be a problem as proposed. My community, I am in fact the president of the RCO, Darnley Park
Civic Association. I'm also the next door neighbor to this, and people are opposed to this. We have
voted in opposition to this project. We submit that it is too dense, and the traffic proposal
will not work. Thank you so much, Ms. French. Thank you. We're going to move on to the next
person we have. The next person is Teresa Kemmerer. They have been allowed to speak.
Kemmerer, please state your name and spell it for the court reporter.
I'm sorry, Mr. Chair. They all put their hand down. You can proceed.
Do we have anyone else in the virtual audience? No further answer, Mr. Chair.
i understand she may be still there um yeah she's i am i am here are you asking for theresa
kayler yes can you please state your name and spell it for the court reporter yes this is
theresa kayler t-h-e-r-e-s-a last name kayler k-e-h-l-e-r miss kayler do you swear to tell
the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth i do please proceed uh so i just wanted
to speak on this in the fact that we are the neighboring RCO to the Durnley Park Civic.
I wanted to let everyone know officially on the record that we had voted to be in non-opposition
of this project after several meetings with the developer in which they had addressed many of our
concerns. And we had agreed to, at this point, not oppose the... We take one of two stances. We
We had voted as a board not to oppose going forward once certain changes were made to address our concerns.
Full disclosure, we are not the RCO that governs this area, but at the time that the development plans were being submitted, there was no active RCO governing this area.
So myself as the president of the abutting CRTO and the abutting RCO president from the other end of this area had met with the developer many, many times, had addressed the concerns.
He had addressed many of our concerns and he had to reduce the density of the project.
So I just wanted to go on record for him as saying that our RCO, the Upper Roxborough Civic Association, voted to not oppose.
And we do appreciate the multiple meetings that he showed up to both in person on the site and via Zoom for both civic associations to be a part of.
I do recognize that Durnley Park Civic has been resurrected since that time, and we do, of course, you know, respect their opinion as the civic association that is governing that area now.
We just wanted to stand to say that the developer had been very receptive to the other two RCOs that were the only ones in play at the time that this started.
Thank you, Ms. Keller, for your testimony. Do we have anyone else in the virtual audience?
Yes, Mr. Chair, Marlene Schleifer has been allowed to speak.
Ms. Schleifer, can you please state your name and spell it for the court reporter?
My name is Marlene Schleifer. It's M-A-R-L-E-N-E. My last name is S-C-H-L-E-I-F as in Frank, E-R.
and i am the president of rich park civic association and also it's rco representative
the whole truth and nothing but the truth absolutely yes so we did we did receive your
Absolutely, yes.
So we did receive your RCO letter, and we understand where your position is. Is there anything else you would like to just add so we can get everyone's testimony on the record?
No, I think the letter is self-explanatory. We worked extensively with the developers who listened to everything we had to say,
and they came down from a significantly larger project to this one and we feel that we felt
that it was reasonable and at the time Durnley Park Civic was inactive so we were asked by the
councilman's office to get involved which we did um so we support this and uh we hope that you will
too thank you very much um thank you for your testimony as well um do we have anyone else in
virtual audience? Yes, Jacob Bash. He has been about to speak.
Hi, my name is Jacob Bosch.
Bosch, can you please state your name and spell it for the court reporter, please?
Jacob Bosch, J-A-C-O-B-B-A-S-C-H.
You swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes. Are you in favor of this project? I am.
thank you anyone else in the virtual audience all right we're moving on to planning
thank you again chair michael gall with the philadelphia city planning commission
the comprehensive plan recommends a change to the zoning at this location from rsd3 residential
single family detached to rsd1 the property sits on a block that has been heavily altered in recent
years in filling and abutting rsd zoned property with 30 detached single-family homes the appellant
has not demonstrated that the proposed multi-family development would not have detrimental impacts but
beyond what might be expected therefore the city planning commission recommends the board grant
the requested variances for multiple principal uses of and buildings and maximum occupied lot area
and grant the requested variance for multi-family household use but with a proviso recommended of
maximum 10 units thank you uh we're going to close the record can we just respond to that briefly
sure just given the nature of the resumption hearing i just want to sorry just give the
nature of the resumption hearing i just want to remind everyone that the whole premise of reducing
to the 12 units was to be consistent with the rsd3 designation this is a 60 000 square foot lot so
5 000 per lot is required there's 12 homes at 60 000 square feet 12 is the appropriate density
And we did present expert testimony from traffic, a traffic engineer specifying how our traffic plan worked.
And we were responsive to several community concerns about that.
So we just wanted to make sure the board was mindful of all the prior testimony that has occurred.
As we know, this has been an ongoing process.
It's fitting we resume today.
It's two years to the date when our clients first presented this.
So it's been a long process.
We thank you so much.
We thank you for your patience and all the time you put into this project.
Appreciate it.
thank you and we will we will hold the vote until um next week at 2 p.m um we need some members
because we've had a multi-part hearing and we've had different forums hearing it we will need
members to review different parts of the video so that they can all be prepared to vote but the
record is otherwise closed great thank you thank you thank you so yeah we'll be closing this and
We'll vote on it next week at 2 p.m.
May I be permitted to say something in conclusion?
It's already closed at this point.
I got it.
Counsel?
Unfortunately, we've already closed the record on that.
Sorry about that.
Is Mr. Goodman available as of yet?
Is he ready?
All right. Can we please promote Mr. Goodman?
All right. He will be coming back in as a panelist shortly, Mr. Chair.
Thank you.
Hello?
Good afternoon.
afternoon uh can you please state your name again and dispel it for the court reporter we just want
to get it on the record before you uh go into your presentation yeah it's William Goodman
thank you do you swear to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth
yep all right um please proceed and you've already got your testimony on file
please share your screen
Share the screen.
Share the screen.
Where are we at here with sharing?
There you go.
I think so.
Can they see the screen?
Can you see the screen?
Not as of yet.
All right, hold on.
it would be that green button at the bottom of your screen
green button let's make it yep and just make sure you have the documents already
oh there it is and then you want to click on the documents that you would like to share
this one that one yeah yeah look at it
there you go now can they see it now you can see it now right
yes thank you
let me see what I'm here
where's my cursor
there we go
alright
we have your refusal there
we can start going through
the actual packet
yeah hold on
how do you move
How do you move down?
Say my name.
You move down.
Oh, you got a touch screen.
Drive me nuts.
That's the refusal.
Then you have the application
for special reception.
Project information.
all right let's see here okay all right this is the proposal for the greenhouse okay all right
all right now so just tell us what you're trying to do and then we can try to help you you know
get through this all right um i'm basically i'm trying to put up a greenhouse okay now the issue
is Mayfair doesn't have backyards
or side
yards.
So, the only
place that I can put it is in the front
Now, I
have discussed this with all my neighbors.
Let me get you all this.
And we see that the
Homebird Civics Association is in support
of the yard. Yes.
Yes, they are.
as a matter of fact several of the members
thought it was a really good idea
because I share my
vegetables with my neighbors
and so I should
everyone's there
can you go back to some of those pictures just for a little bit
we want to see how close
to the front curb this right here is
oh okay
this is an existing
fence from when I bought the house
it's within the perimeters
of the existing
fence.
All right?
And how high is this structure
going to be?
Let me go back up here.
Yeah, let me go up here.
It'll be easier to do it.
at this side,
it's eight foot high.
At this side, it's nine foot high.
I have a one inch or one foot slope
for runoff.
and how high is the current fence
I'm sorry
the current fence is only 6 feet
no no no the current fence
is a 4 foot fence
alright
and everything is within the perimeters of the fence
now the thing is
when I went on the L&I website
it gave me
the height requirements the square footage and that it can't be attached to an existing structure
okay and that i would not need a permit but it turns out that i do need the variance
because we don't have like i said we don't have backyards all right we have a driveway behind the
house all right let me get that up here um so consequently i had to stop and my neighbors for
almost the last year have been looking at this thank god they liked me in their understanding
um there's a list of all my neighbors i actually went around to every one of them
and asked them you know if they had any problems with it whatsoever and
and asked them, you know,
if they had any problems with it whatsoever.
And every one of them is on board.
That's every house on the block.
All right, that's a letter from the zoning board.
I'm sorry, the Homesburg Association.
This is 130 letters that I had to send out.
This is the letter from the
Ellensburg Association
saying they do not oppose.
There's a copy of my deed for the property.
My current taxes.
That's it.
I'm just trying to extend my growing season
so that I can
have more
of extra hits that I saw from my neighbors.
Understood. We're going to
ask some questions from the board.
Yes, so
I have a question. So I can see that you've
got your new greenhouse structure is
going to be up against your property fence.
In the area between
your fence and your porch, what
activities and how are you going to treat
the ground there?
You're talking
this area here?
Yeah, so between the door to the greenhouse and the railing and the stairway for your porch, what's happening there?
This section is an existing, I guess, concrete slab patio?
Mm-hmm.
Hold on.
I know I have a better...
Here we go.
All right.
Now, these here are growing pots?
are those raised bed planters are they going to be
like planter
no no they're in ground
because what we do
is we used to do the entire circumference
but with the greenhouse I can extend my growing
season
this section here is
the picnic table and just the outside area
so it's just sort of like your family recreation
the same way the other front yards
are currently being used
correct
and the
greenhouse is
actually
transparent
I mean with all
the windows
the roofing that I have is
clear corrugated
you know
for the sunlight and all that but like i say i mean it's virtually transparent you know i understand
that the greenhouse uh another question i have about your structure are you planning to have
it um plumbed or connected to water utility no no so how where's your water source for you to
service your garden in your greenhouse well i mean i do have a hose okay so you're just using
Yeah, but now that you're walling in the greenhouse, how are you going to water the plants inside the greenhouse?
Well, I got a 150-foot hose, so I can just drag the hose in there and do it.
But I do have different irrigation systems, and I'm planning on doing water catchment for what comes off the roof.
What's your plan for the water runoff from the roof?
uh it's just a 55 gallon drum okay um and then how are you managing stormwater runoff that's
now happening in the in the rest of the of your front yard because you've got the paved area and
you have the the greenhouse oh what gets absorbed into the ground there is uh
I guess relief holes
behind the wall.
Like perimeter drains?
Is it a perforated pipe
that you installed?
Yes, I did.
And is that tying
into the wastewater inside your
house? No.
So where does that perimeter
drain? It's just draining into the
Well, onto the sidewalk and out to the curb.
The way it was designed.
You know, when you have a retaining wall, they put the holes at the bottom.
The weak holes.
Right.
Okay, so it's going out.
Right.
And then are you doing any...
If I had that area covered, I wanted to make sure whatever wood I don't collect, you know, is able to go where it's supposed to go.
you know, is he able to
go where it's supposed to go?
No, no, I understand you.
And then are there any lights in your
greenhouse or in your
front yard now?
But I do have
12-volt
grow lights that I got.
just run them off of
just basically a car battery charger.
Anything with 12 volts.
Are you putting that, so, okay,
and you're just keeping it out there?
Understood.
I'm trying to make the structure basically
is independent
from other utilities.
I get what you're trying to do.
I think I'm asking you questions
because you're in this gray area
where it would trigger
building permits and this would be considered
a structure and not, and I think
we're just trying to understand
the parameters of it
so that we can understand what we
are able to say yes to.
Yeah, it's like you said,
it's basically a structure so I can grow.
You know what I mean?
And like I said,
I got just a water catchment system so I can use whatever runoff I can if we get enough rain.
And then what's anchoring the walls of your greenhouse into the dirt?
There's two-foot extensions.
Plus the fact where it's the weight of the walls and it's surrounded by a four-foot fence, it basically can't move.
I mean, each wall weighs about 200 pounds
with the longer and everything.
But I do have, excuse me, rebar
going down about two feet.
Understood. Any other questions from the board?
Any questions?
Questions from our attorney, Hilary Emberson.
Not at this time, Mr. Chair.
Questions from the audience.
Any questions in the virtual audience?
Yes, I have a handout from a Camilla Zakin.
I've allowed them to speak.
Good afternoon.
can you please state your name and spell it for the court sonographer? Hi, my name is Camilla
Zucchini. It is spelled C-A-M-I-L-A-Z-U-K-I-E-N-E. Where to spell the truth, the whole truth,
and nothing but the truth. I do. Please proceed.
Good morning. As I said, my name is Camilla Zucchini and I have prepared to speak in full
support of my neighbor's request to build a greenhouse in his front yard. This is more than
just a structure. It's an opportunity for growth, both literally and figuratively in our neighborhood.
On our block, we don't have backyards. The only outdoor space available for homeowners is the
front yard, using the rear space is not a viable option as it would block the rear exits and
garage access, posing a serious safety concern in case of an emergency. For homeowners like my
neighbor, this makes a front yard greenhouse not just a preference but a necessity. It is the only
way to expand the growing season and space without compromising safety. This greenhouse represents
self-determination for owner-occupants in this increasingly renter-occupied neighborhood.
It gives residents a chance to shape and take pride in their space. More importantly, it fosters
community engagement where already seen how this space has been a gathering place, hosting movie
nights for the kids sparking conversations amongst neighbors and sharing gardening knowledge this
greenhouse would build on that foundation offering new ways for neighbors including children to come
together learn and work toward something positive in in a time when blight is increasing and drugs
in a time when blight is increasing and drugs are a concern in our corners we need to encourage and
are a concern in our corner.
support positive additions to our streets a well-maintained greenhouse is not an eyesore
it's a symbol of hope and activity it gives us a reason to be outside to interact to counteract
the growing trend of isolation and suspicion rather than hiding indoors we can be a part
of something productive and life-affirming. And for my retired neighbor, gardening is more than
a pastime. It's a lifeline. It's a way to stay sane, stay busy, stay connected.
This greenhouse is not just for him. It benefits all of us. It strengthens our community,
beautifies our block, and reinforces the kind of neighborhood we want to have.
Given the unique challenge of our block, approving this greenhouse is not just reasonable, it's necessary.
I urge you to support this initiative just as my neighbor is supporting the well-being of our community through this project.
Thank you.
Thank you so much, and we will note your support for the record.
Is there anyone else out there in the virtual audience?
No, Mr. Chair, no further hand.
Thank you. We'll go to planning.
Thank you again, Chair. Michael Gall with the Philadelphia City Planning Commission.
The comprehensive plan recommends no change to the RSA-5 residential single-family attached zoning at this location.
The structure was erected without the benefit of permits.
The appellant has not demonstrated that the property cannot be used in conformance with the zoning code.
Therefore, the City Planning Commission recommends the board deny the requested variance for accessory agricultural structure in the front yard.
Thank you. So what we're going to do is we're going to hold this vote and take this to executive session and see with all of the members how they feel on this actual project.
And we'll be able to make an announcement. We'll vote on this next week at two o'clock.
And the record is closed. The record is closed at this point. Thank you so much for all your testimonies.
Moving on to the next case, MI-2024-006066, 1921 West Norwich Street.
Daniel Maluxis.
David, coming back in as a panel shortly.
good afternoon members of the board good afternoon council please state your name and spell it for
the court sonographer my name is daniel mclevage my last name is spelled m-u-k-l-e-w-i-c-s and cat
z's and zebra you swear to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth
We have, Mrs. Graham is going to have a few questions for you.
Good afternoon.
Have you emailed all the required documents and exhibits needed to proceed with this case
five days prior to this hearing?
This is a continued matter from the week prior.
This case was rescheduled from last week due to the Zoom issues that we had.
oh it's a new it's a new hearing it's not a resumption hearing oh oh it's okay all
right so do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy
yes i do okay thank you you can proceed and put your presentation up
Can everyone? Oh, I'm sorry. Let me. Yes, we can see it.
Can you see the notice of refusal? Is that on your screen? Yes. Okay.
Members of the board, my client is seeking a variance for the proposed use of a property
located at 1921 West Norris Street for it as a two family dwelling. The zoning application
it provides for the erection of a rear third floor addition to an existing attached structure
for use as a two-family household living. The reason for the refusal was that the use,
that the property is currently zoned in an RSA 5 district. With the notice of refusal, I also
With the notice of refusal, I also provided the application for appeal and project information form.
Attached here, you'll see this is the deed to the property, which best title in my client, Celine Payne, who is here with me today.
This is a picture. The red building is 1921 West Norris Street, which is nearby in the Temple University neighborhood.
As you can see, to the right here is a vacant structure. It's a three-story dwelling.
Currently, its use is as a single family home.
It's currently vacant at the moment and has been for several years.
As you'll see here, the blue icon is where the property is located.
As you can see, the immediate vicinity is all zoned as RSA 5.
However, when you zoom out, you can see that there are RM1 districts.
in the surrounding blocks.
This is an overview from Philadelphia Atlas, which shows the 1900 block of West Norris Street.
Right here where the pin is, is the property location. As you can see, there's a number of
vacant properties in the area. This is directly across the street from the subject property.
As you can see, this row is all vacant property. So my client's intention is to rehab the property
and put it to good use and get it occupied.
This is an aerial view of the property.
And as I previously stated, my client's intention is to
is for a rear third story addition.
So as you can see here, the the third floor
is it it's his intention is to extend this out so that it's in line with the with the second floor
but however that was just a little details on the on the addition however that was not the
reason for the refusal. There are other multifamily properties in the in the immediate vicinity.
Attach I'm showing you here a 1948 North 19th Street and 1950 North 19th Street
all within approximately half a block from the subject property.
I believe both are zoned as a two-family dwelling.
Similarly, down the block, this is a 1949 West Norris Street.
this is a the bottom floor is a commercial commercial space and this is a two-family
household on the on the floors above
previously my client had applied for and was successfully granted a a permit on
On June 27, 2026, he obtained a use variance to convert the property from a single-family
home to a two-family dwelling.
And previously at that time, he obtained the support of the community on the project.
However, despite the prior approval of the use permit, the permit expired in 2019 before
my client cemented its intended use. So my client, as you'll hear him state, he's ready,
willing, and able to proceed with the construction aspect and conversion of the property to a
two-family dwelling.
What you what you're seeing here, this is the the zoning plans with the dimensions and proposed elevations for the for the property.
below are the floor plans and as you can see the so the the first floor plan is the unit one
has a has a one bedroom living area living space unit two has three bedrooms
we conducted and we attended the RCO meeting with the beach community organization on January 8th
at 5 30 p.m. after relaying the details of our projects we did receive a letter of support
from the Beach Community Services RCO.
I'm showing you the letter of support
and also the meeting summary here.
As you'll see here, this is the zoning notice.
And as you'll see, this is a timestamp photograph of the zoning notice and board notice of hearing.
As you can see, it's reflected on the exterior of the property.
As this was a continued matter from last week, we did receive another zoning notice,
which which my client which my client posted to the building.
So this is the updated notice, which my client posted of today's continued hearing date.
Obviously, we didn't have a substantial amount of time.
My client posted the notice as soon as he was able.
and you'll see here this is the certificate of tax clearance for the property
in summation my client is seeking approval for the use variance which was previously granted
my client is a contractor who who has other properties within the within the temple university
A NEIGHBORHOOD. AS I STATED, HE IS READY, WILLING, AND ABLE AND IS ABLE TO EXECUTE ON
HIS PLAN FOR CONVERTING THE SINGLE-FAMILY HOME TO A TWO-FAMILY RESIDENCE. AND WE SEEK
THE BOARD'S APPROVAL AND ASK THAT YOU SUPPORT OUR PROJECT.
thank you i'm going to bring your client on to um test your testimony
yes uh mr pain are you there
yes thank you i'm about to speak sir mr pain can you please state your name and spell it for the
court sonographer saline pain s-a-l-e-m pain p-y-n-a you swear without the truth the whole
truth and nothing but the truth yes please proceed counsel mr pain did did you hear my testimony today
regarding uh the proposed project yes um was everything true and accurate to the best of your
knowledge? Yes. Do you adopt my testimony today as your own? Yes. Okay. I just have a few
brief topics I want you to relate to the board. Can you tell me a little bit about your background
as a general contractor? I've done several projects in the area. I own a property right
across the street that I ran out as well, 1949 Norris Street. I have projects, properties
a little further down, 2349 North 20th Street in the community. And I've done several other
projects in other communities as well. Okay. Approximately how many, do you know how many
Approximately how many, do you know how many properties you own?
properties you own
I mean, I flip, I buy and sell a lot. So, I mean, currently probably like 14, maybe.
Okay. And do you own any other multifamily properties?
Okay. And can you tell the board a little bit about the proposed project?
um the project uh is it going to be anything different from what you already know no no okay
uh we'll move on uh just just briefly uh you obtained a zoning permit uh to use the property
as a two-family home in 2016. um you know i understand the permit lapsed can you can you
tell explain to the board why this time would be different um i just the funds are available now
um back then it wasn't at the time so i was going through a hardship and um i wasn't aware of the um
the lapse of the uh zoning i didn't know i didn't know it was three years i thought it was a little
longer but um so we just um resubmitted everything and i'm i'm ready to uh move forward with the
project okay thank you uh questions from the board yes so with the new addition how are the two units
going to be laid out across the building i want to say that again let me see thank you yeah and
And then what is the expected use currently for the basement?
Mr. Payne, you could speak to that, but as it reflected in the floor plans, you can see that there are no, my understanding is that it will be used for storage and it won't be, there won't be any living space in the basement.
Is the plan to finish the basement?
Sorry, I'll let Mr. Payne speak to that.
Yeah, just not finished as far as living space.
Just finished storage unit.
That's like storage for maybe I think the first apartment.
There's nothing finished as far as living area.
That requires maybe like underpinning, digging, things like that.
no that's not what that requires but the building standing requires the underpinning but
um it's you answered the question thank you any other questions from the board
questions from our attorney hillary emerson not at this time mr chair any questions from
the virtual audience or in the audience.
Yeah, I have a hand up from Judith Robertson. I have allowed them to speak.
Mrs. Robertson, please state your name and tell it for the
court sonographer. Yes. Good afternoon. Can you
hear me? We can. Please state your name. Okay.
Judith Robertson, J-U-D-I-T-H
R-O-B-I-N-S-O-N.
And I am
Swear to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth
Are you in favor of this project?
I don't have a decision regarding that
But I do want to ask about the sanitation plan
That is in the 32nd Ward
And I am former representative emeritus
Of 32nd Ward RCO
I don't remember this process this project coming through in 2016 as to that point I would have been the facilitator of a meeting so I'm just asking about the sanitation plan because we have a major issue with sanitation management and the 32nd Ward.
sure counsel are you able to answer that um so mr uh pain and i have had an opportunity to
discuss this and we we did discuss this with the the rco um mr pain can confirm this but my
understanding is that you know uh tenants would be instructed you know to you know to take trash out
only on trash days as i understand it that you know the first unit would have a um you know would
have a rear backyard for potential storage if needed.
I'll let Mr. Payne speak to that in a little greater detail,
though.
Yes, here.
um uh yes we we talked about it uh the space for the first unit has um yard and um they will be
able to store the trash back there until the potential trash day um will will management
company will
a necessary
need of saying, you know,
letting the tenants know that
trash is only
to be put out on trash day.
that's pretty much it.
Where would the second unit store their trash?
I don't know. Daniel,
does he have anything in there in the planes?
So, there isn't anything in the plans as far as trash storage?
I mean, we could provide bins. I've done it in other cases.
So, you would give them access to the rear yard, like the first unit?
it's possible yes I can
they can get access to the first yard
to the yard to the rear unit to the first unit
are you okay
with making that a proviso
I can't see how you make that
at least
that they can go to somebody else's unit
to get to the basement that kind of doesn't make sense
I think
The issue and the concern is, is there a place within that second floor unit for them to store trash within their unit, a designated trash room until trash day?
Possible trash compactor, garbage disposer, those are items we have discussed in the past.
Even those little closets can get a little funky if they don't have ventilation. So we're very much concerned about that because when people don't have areas, they bring it outside. That's just what happens. And it's been over a decade of us monitoring this process. Thank you.
Thank you, Ms. Robinson.
SO THE PLANS AS CURRENTLY LAID OUT I DON'T BELIEVE IT DOES PROVIDE FOR A PANTRY BUT I DON'T BELIEVE
THEY'RE SO COUNCIL WHAT WE'LL DO IS WE'LL CONTINUE AND GO THROUGH THE REST OF THIS AND HOLD IT BUT WE
WILL NEED SOME KIND OF EXPLANATION ON A TRASH PLANT OKAY BEFORE WE VOTE ON THIS ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FROM
the board? Questions from our attorney, Hillary Emerson?
I think if the board wants additional information about the trash plan, we'll need to conduct
a very brief resumption hearing for that information.
Thank you. Questions from the audience? Any questions from the virtual audience?
no further enhance mr chair thank you mr hand planning commission thank you chair michael gall
with the philadelphia city planning commission again the comprehensive plan recommends no change
to the rsa 5 residential single family zoning at this location there is no unique physical condition
or circumstance of the property that would prevent it from being used in strict conformity with the
zoning code therefore the city planning commission recommends that the board deny the proposed use
variance for two dwelling units council so what we're going to do is we're going to hold the vote
on this um the board is looking for some additional information on the uh trash um storage um for the
community's sake as well um and we'll bring the resumption hearing on april the 2nd at 2 p.m
okay all right thank you you have a good one thank you we're going to take a break
right now for about five minutes and we'll come back and we'll jump into one 3 30 case
and then we'll come right back and jump into the rest of the two o'clock list
Okay, so we're going to just divert off for one second and go to a case from the 330 case.
MI-2024-006214, 7101 Taleb Street.
71-01 Taleb Street.
Zen Jin is attorney for the applicant.
Mr. Chair, they are coming back in as a panelist now.
Thank you, Mr. Henn.
Good afternoon.
Good afternoon, counsel.
Can you please state your name and spell it for the court sonographer?
Yes, my name is Zen Jin, Z-H-E-N.
Last name is J-I-N, on behalf of the applicant.
You swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Can you identify your client?
Yes, my client is Marlon Valadez.
He's the owner of the property.
Thank you.
Our board member, Ms. Graham, has a few questions for you.
Good afternoon.
have you emailed all the required documents and exhibits needed to proceed with this case five
days prior to this hearing? Yes, with the exception that the RCO letter was not received by our
office. It might have been submitted directly to the board. Okay, and do you agree to waive the
reading of the refusal and do you stipulate to its accuracy? I do. Okay, thank you.
Thank you. I'm going to share with the board the case information we previously submitted.
Sorry. Can the board see my exhibit on their screen? Yes. Thank you. So we submitted the
copy of the refusal. The RCO's response through a series of emails, since we didn't get the actual
letter, property history, photos, plans, and related documentation. What I want to direct
the board attention to first is that we are requesting the use of the property of the
multifamily of four units and existing structure. It is zoned in an RSA 5 district. This application
came because of a violation that my client was issued to my client from L&I. The L&I
indicated in their violation that my client's property originally was a three-family unit
with a mixed use in addition. When my client purchased the property, he hired a contractor
who advised that actually the records show four units. Therefore, you can just put the basement
unit in, which was done. And that led to the violation. We did meet with the community and
And given their feedback, I think, and I want to make this clear to the board, that we are
not seeking four units before the board today.
The community is not in agreement with the additional uses.
We discussed with them that three units would have been the existing permitted with a mixed
They talked to the neighbors and indicated to me by email, at least, that most likely
the neighbors would ask for two units.
Now, two units will be under what is already in the record permitted for the use of the property.
So we would only ask the board to reaffirm the three units that exist.
And we are willing, my client is willing to take away the basement unit so that there'll be no living in the basement.
But instead of having it as a mixed use, the basement would simply be used for storage.
I'm going to direct the board to the plans to better understand what is going on with this.
Well, actually, before that, let's take a look at the property history real quick.
I just want to let the board see that this property, in fact, was since the 1960s, apparently, by variance, a change to five family dwelling with a housekeeping unit.
And in one way or another, the three units on the upper floor was maintained.
And then the basement was also structured as a unit, which my client renovated, but apparently that was not ultimately what was in the record.
L&I's record seems to indicate that it is still the storefront with three family as the legal use.
And that additional use of five units, for whatever reason, is not what is in the record.
What we have from the property itself, this is a big corner property with this three-story structure.
This is the front of the property, and this is the side of the property.
As you can see, there are some existing decks.
My client actually redid the retaining wall, which triggered its own violation, but it's actually under two feet.
So I believe that violation, we can challenge L&I and resolve.
The property is rather large and is laid out already as multifamily when he purchased it.
The property is rather large and is laid down.
He did do renovations inside, changing the floor, adding new kitchen cabinets so that the property is in good condition and renovated.
However, the key issue here is, of course, the basement unit, which was added in.
So the plans show the additional units.
I'm going to zoom in so it's easier for the board to see exactly what each floor entails.
So the basement is actually a separated unit with its own entrance on the side of the building.
And this is the basement layout, which is current.
Again, we're in agreement to remove this unit and restore it back to simply storage and laundry
for, and maybe recreation area for the upper floor units.
So this will no longer be used as a living space.
The first floor unit is, again, the entries in the front.
This front entry leads up to the second and third floor unit.
And then the first floor unit actually comes in through the back up to its porch
and then enters from the side of the property.
The second and third floor unit enters from the front, goes upstairs, and they each have their own unit with their own small side deck.
And again, the upper floor design was how it was when he purchased the property.
He did, again, renovate the property to enhance the various parts.
And I believe he refurbished the deck, which I think L&I is indicating that it needs to be set back.
So we're probably going to have to remove that deck as well.
All of that for compliance purposes, although it doesn't directly impact the zoning today,
We just wanted to be clear with the board that all those items are being addressed and we're not going to ignore those items as we move forward.
So for the purpose of today, again, what we're asking from the board is to essentially reaffirm what the uses of the three units and eliminating the fourth unit.
So even though the refusal asked for four, we're actually asking the board for three units to remain with the basement level unit to be removed as any kind of living space and three units total in the building, but no mixed use.
That basement was already structured more as a living space.
It was never really still a storefront.
So we don't want to maintain the mixed use that's in the record.
So I know my client is here.
I'm happy to try to further explain if the board has any questions or redirect to any part of my
exhibits. Let's get your client on to adopt your testimony and then we can see what the board has.
Sure. Marlon, can you raise your hand virtually to be identified?
They'll be coming back in as a panel shortly. They should be coming back in.
Thank you.
Great.
Marlon, if you could just unmute.
Thank you.
Can you state your name and spell it for the course?
Marlon Baladares.
M-A-R-L-O-N
Do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
I swear.
Thank you.
Sir, could you spell your last name as well for the stenographer?
Thank you.
B-A-L-L-A-V-A-R-E-Z-L-A-Y-Z-E-B-A
Thank you.
Thank you.
Marlon, did you hear my representation to the zoning board and did you see my presentation
before the zoning board? Yes. Can you verify what we're requesting before the board to be
true and correct and also adopt my testimony as your own? Yes. Thank you. Do you have any questions
from the board?
When did you purchase,
when did your client
purchase the property, please?
The property was purchased
according to the deed.
The property was purchased
in February of 2024.
So just last year?
Last year. Correct. Okay. And at the time that this property, that he purchased this property,
Last year, correct.
And at the time that this property...
it had three units in it? Is that what you're saying? It actually had three units and there
was the basement level that was not fitted out as a residential unit. Correct. Okay. And when did he
do the fitting out, if you will, of the basement? So the work was done. Let me take a look at the
notices. It was done sometime during the summer in June or July, and then the stop work order
and the violation came in October of last year. And we filed, of course, the zoning application
immediately upon receiving the notice. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Any other questions from
the board? If I may just show the board on the violation notice, I do want to point out that
But L&I's own notice says that it's a, sorry, let me share that with the board.
L&I's notice says the original use was mixed use with three units.
And in fact, their main concern was that basement unit to be returned to approved use, which would have been the mixed use.
So we're asking the board simply to allow the three units to remain, but basement would be used only as storage, utilities and shared space, recreation.
no no living in the basement is there any zoning proof of the previously approved use i'm not
seeing it in atlas so oh i i actually showed it earlier i'll put that back up on the screen
hold on one second you're going a little fast sorry i'll put that back up um let me and then
my question is at purchase had any research been done about the property um and any understanding
of the RSA-5 zoning district?
I think with my client,
so my client purchased the property
with the understanding that the units were existing.
I think when he hired a contractor,
I'm going to put the zoning proof up first
for the board, one second.
So this is the record,
Atlas record that is available.
and this is going back quite a few years but as you can see three families storefront was
the existing they actually whoever owned it at that time actually thought of a five dwelling with
a one housekeeping and four non-housekeeping units i believe this was ultimately approved
because if you look at the stamping on here, it was use registration with that variance record
in the histories. So when my client purchased it, there was three units plus the basement.
He hired a contractor who apparently told him that because of the history, there should be
four units, should be fine, went ahead and did the work, then got the violation. He immediately
stopped everything, vacated the entire premises. In fact, there's no tenants in there now.
My client is trying to follow whatever is required to comply. And he wanted to first
talk to the neighborhood and apply for four units. The neighborhood's feedback is, of course,
they don't want to see the basement unit, which he agrees to remove at this point. So that's why
we're only seeking three units before the board to be reaffirmed without the mixed use, because
we don't think that oh there's gonna it's not going to be used in a mixed use format for that
space did we know the last time this building was occupied was that just closed at the sale
that uh marlon do you know it was the building still occupied when you purchased it or uh
how long has it been vacant do you happen to know
you're still muted no that's empty it's empty it was empty when you purchased it yeah
yeah i'm my concern is that there's a 2009 zoning permit that defined it as single family
um i know you found the one from 1960 but there's one that was later which would have been the most
recent one and that also all of the lni violations started in march shortly after the property was
purchased there's 58 lni violations on this property specific to the construction related
to the to the subject that we're talking about right now and i'm that does concern me
right so to my to my understanding a lot of violations um relates they're all connected
of course but the so when when my client put in the new retaining wall that had it's that had
that had triggered a violation based on the height of the retaining wall and needing construction
triggered a violation based on the height of the retaining wall and needing construction
permits. In fact, I was reading that particular violation. I think a large number directly
connects to that. Their violation connected to the deck that I'm aware of. And then the final,
of course, one of the violations that we apply for zoning for is the use violation itself.
yeah it's just series of violations just it's concerning that's all yeah and we're in the
actually in the process of complying um all those violations this is one piece of the compliance as
well would you all be open should the board grant approval to um a proviso requiring a co
oh not not an issue yeah we have no problem with that
any other questions from the board
questions from our attorney Hillary Emerson
only to note if the board grants in for fewer
units than is on the refusal
we'll need to do a proviso for the number of units we're approving and we can do
a proviso for a certificate of occupancy as well if the board would like
and we can do one for no household living in the basement as well
thank you questions from the audience any questions from the vote the virtual audience
i do not see any hands mr chair thank you mr hand planning commission
thank you chair michael gall with the city planning commission the comprehensive plan
recommends no change to the rsa 5 residential single family attached zoning at this location
the property has a documented history of multifamily residential use dating back to 1960
and is physically configured for multifamily use therefore the city planning commission
recommended the board grant the requested variance for multifamily use but with a
proviso recommended at a maximum of three units if i 2024-006-214-7101 to lap street
my vote is yes with proviso no basement household living as well as there it needs to be a co
prior to utilizing the property as well as a limit of no more than three units in the
maximum three units
my vote is yes with provisors
charl gaston my vote is yes with provisors
tennetta graham my vote is yes with provisors
my vote is yes with provisors
thank you
number seven mi-2024-006-899
2045 north carolina street
mr alan knockinson we'll be calling off um five cases together um let me read them all off and
then we can go through them as well i'm going to hear that with mi-2024-006-900-2016 nor cowlisle
Street, MI-2024-006902, 2022, North Carlisle Street, MI-2024-006917, 2037, North Carlisle
street and number 13 mi-2024-006-919-2040 north carlisle street
turn your mic on yeah it's first time i've got you gotta get hot
it's been a while uh uh good afternoon members of the board alan knockamson of knockamson pc
A-L-A-N-N-O-C-H-U-M-S-O-N.
To my left is Firas Al-Sayed, who is the owner of the property.
You swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
Our board member, Graham, has a few questions.
Good afternoon.
Have you emailed all the required documents and exhibits needed to proceed with this case five days prior to this hearing?
Yes, I have.
okay and do you agree to wait a reading out of refusal and do you stipulate to its accuracy
i do you can proceed all right thank you and counselor if you can just let us know which
ones you're going to work on so we can uh so i filed them separately but i created a joint packet
um which we typically do just to streamline the process um but we have them individual but we have
joint packets for presentation purposes. So we are going to review 2016, 22, 37, 40, and 45.
So we are going to review 2016, 22, 37, 40, and 45 North Carlisle Street.
If you're familiar with the Temple University area, this is a half a block off of North Broad Street, right in the heart of the Temple University section, not far from here.
And we have several notice of refusal, one for each.
Mr. Nockmson, sorry, quick question, and I'm sorry if I missed this.
can you uh the ownership listing it for three of the properties is the same and then it has
two different entities can you just clarify how everything's related together yeah it's the same
ownership group i can and i i apologize i can go through the deeds and and then i'll point out
specifically who's the owner for each one okay that's fine yeah it's deep in my presentation
yes yes i just want to clarify for the record that it's the same ownership entity even though
it's a list of different entities but the same ownership group essentially thank you all right
so we have notices of refusal it's a essentially the same thing over and over again we have an
interesting zoning classification we're not rsa5 we're not rm1 we're we are spi special purposes
institutional so it's a zoning classification you'll see near uh colleges of this sort and um
What we're proposing is to have three family dwelling units in each of these properties.
And we'll go through the presentation, but my philosophy in zoning variance law in any jurisdiction, including Philadelphia, is if you walk by the property built or used as proposed, does it stick out like a sore thumb or is it something that fits within the fabric of the neighborhood?
So, again, what's the property to the left of us look like?
What's the property to the right of us look like?
What do the properties on this 100 block of Carlisle Street look like? And you'll see that we are in conformance to what everyone else is. And we have a whole list of properties. And that's what we're seeking to doing. And the multifamily use is more in conformance than the RSA 5 use that they're trying to push on us in terms of single family use.
But we met with the community. We had three members of the community attend, all the same household on that block. They all live in a single family home. And they were all against it. But those are the only individuals that are against it.
My client and their ownership group is well known in the Temple area. Actually, behind me in the audience is Omar Asayad, who actually went to Temple University, graduated with a degree in engineering, and his family has 45 units or 50 units in the Temple area.
He self-manages these properties. He's well thought of. My understanding is that Judith Robinson from the 32nd Democratic Ward is online, who will speak to that as well. We also did a petition after the meeting. We thought that this was a straightforward project in the sense that everyone else has three units on that block. Not everyone, but a lot of people do.
And then when we got pushback from one family on that block, who, again, when people speak loud, people listen. And I respect the fact that if you live in a neighborhood, especially your block, you have a say. But you also have to think about what's on that block, where we are in the neighborhood, what makes sense.
And so when we got the letter of opposition, we decided to circulate a petition of properties nearby. And actually, if memory serves me right, I think the neighborhood group asked both of us to circulate a petition because it was not a well-attended meeting.
That petition you'll see are properties that are nearby to us. And then you'll see from a
comparable density point of view of a diagram that I created, aerial views, because we do have
some dimensional variances. So again, this SBI has like an interesting lot coverage requirement
of 70%, where ours is like a little bit over 80%, most of our building structures that we're
proposing. But those building structures that we're proposing are not out of character to
the surrounding area. And I thought the aerial view would show you that as well. Maps of the
area, photographs of the property in the surrounding area, our plans and drawings. It's basically the
same property five times. Our RCO meeting notices, our applications for appeal, our deeds to the
property, where we'll go point by point tell you for record keeping purposes who owns which property
and our certificates of tax clearance. Notices of refusal. Again, it's basically the same thing
over and over again. We're asking for multifamily use, which is not allowed by rights. We're
asking for additional occupied area, which is de minimis in nature. And that goes for
2016, 2022, 2037, 2040, 2045. And I believe that's it.
2045. And I believe that's it. We didn't meet with the community, the community group beach interplex Inc. provided a letter summarizing the meeting. None of this has to do with zoning. You know, there was a discussion about the community is oversaturated, oversaturated with student housing.
Again, it's not like we're in West Philly, way away from the university, or even North Philly, where we're blocks away from the heart of the Temple University.
We're half a block away.
Every single other house nearby, basically, is multifamily in nature.
We're not discriminating.
We can say to individuals, we want to put multifamily here.
These are only two-bedroom units.
Anyone can rent those out.
it's not just students that can rent them out we just want to improve the housing stock because
these houses have been around a while they need some serious tlc would be very expensive to do
it'd be cost prohibitive to do the the tenants that they're receiving as because no one wants
to be around the student housing i mean let's be truthful and frank here like no one wants to live
like they're single family multi-family whatever but my client is responsible landlord so none of
issues are zoning related we talked about trash we have a responsible trash plan um both forward
and backwards and again again judith robinson i hope she's still on i heard her before about
north street but unlike that presentation you'll hear that we're a responsible landlord like she
actually said to us you know what your clients one of the few that actually follow through you
know when we do community benefit programs i take it very seriously that our clients follow through
and you know when they don't we get upset but she said and this is a not a first time that um we've
done work for this ownership group and we did a zoning matter with judith's group at 30 on the
32nd democratic ward not far from here my clients got the variances and did exactly what they said
they were going to do and judith was very appreciative of that so again three members
of the community showed up in opposition all part of the same household and then again i i can hear
it like when someone's very upset the board members are a human you know reaction is going to be okay
i don't want this either but again we're talking about from a legal standpoint or should we be
allowed and i think we've met our burden here and this is the same vote across the board so then my
client reached out personally oh this is actually their petition in opposition after the meeting
they also circulated a petition opposition. So a couple of things. There's only three properties
on that block that signed that petition, 2034, 2028, 2021, North Carlisle Street. I will note
that 2034, there was one individual who signed both of our petitions, one in support, one against,
just making commentary there. And then 2021, the person who signed the petition in opposition to
the multifamily use actually lives in a triplex. So not again, someone is living in something that
we want to build. And then our petition, again, we try to make it simple so you can see it from
an illustrative point of view. These are the individuals that sign our property.
What? The picture before that, was that the trash? It was the trash. So, and again, I actually
talked to my client there were trash examples of trash i again i'll confirm with my client he said
that these were not his properties um and again not related to these properties at all
and then this is the actual um uh map of the signatures we got of the individuals who signed
our petition and again we really try to keep it on carlisle street and nearby
So you can see by the map, the red is the actual properties that are the subject of this appeal, and these are the people who signed where they lived.
And then, again, not out of character to have multifamily living here.
So there are 10 other instances on that block.
so there's five that we you know pinned as our properties but the other 10 on that on that map
are multi-family in nature all triplexes and then you know the you know again the nearby
multi-family 2050 2048 2046 2044 2043 2041 2039 2036 2031 2000 broad 2008 broad
And then here's the backup data, too.
And then here's the backup data too.
And then the aerial views, I think there was a better picture, maybe.
Maybe it's later in my presentation.
But I wanted to focus on the dimensional variance of the lock coverage.
What we're proposing is not out of character to nearby properties.
And I think I have a better picture of that somewhere else.
Maps of the area.
again we're spi like what we're proposing it's not out of character you can actually have group
living here that's not something that i think anyone in the community would want in that in
that respect and we're near rm1 as well so there is no rsa5 there to to allow for single family
and that and single family use is out of character for that block oh here it is um i think is just
showing the building structures in nature. So these building structures go deeper than what
you would expect for this zoning classification. So our proposed use of having building structures
going even deeper than what our current building structures are, which would be less of a variance
in a lot of cases. Like right now, our buildings are non-conforming in nature from an occupied area
standpoint. And then photographs of the property. And this is what I want to bring up too,
just to show good faith my client installed the and at the request of the community my client
installed uh like containers out in the front to again this is a temporary measure this is not
something they want to do the garbage where they're going to be storing is for the first
floor unit they'll be storing their trash in the rear and then the upper floor units uh they'll
have like the steps will have like an area where they can store the trash they would also you know
request a proviso for commercial trash pickup which would run with the land but just to show
like good faith you know they installed uh trash containers and then this is the zoning hearing
notice posters for each of the properties this is north carlisle street to the right to the north of
the property to the south of the property our plans and drawings and we can we can go through
each one or i think they're generally the same these are all three-story structures brick facade
flat and as you can see the examples of what they would be doing in terms of the trash
And again, these are more updated photos of what they currently have here. So this is what they think they're, what they're proposing to do. And this is what they're doing right now.
And then again, they're all the same floor plans, a little dimensionally different, but this is 2016. You come into a vestibule area, you make a left, you have a living room, two bedrooms, and then you have an open floor plan in the lower level.
And then you have going up a flight of steps, you have two bedrooms, a living room, and open floor area. And then you go to a third floor is two bedrooms and a living room as well. And then it's just the same thing. But again, this is 20.
can't see
can't see which one this is
same thing just inverse
living room two bedrooms
and then you have an open floor plan
and then you have two bedrooms and a living room
and then two bedrooms and then a living room
like again open floor plan
and then this is 2037
same thing
basically the same thing 2045 essentially the same thing RCO meeting notices we'll go through
this quickly I know we're running late in the hour but is this our notice is our proof of
mailing of that notice for each one and then we'll I want to make sure we go through the d and
there are applications for appeal but I want to make sure we go through the deed so for record
keeping purposes. You'll know for each property who owns it.
Here in the deeds. So first is Abdel who's in the back. His brother is here.
And then next one is, and that's for 2016. That's what I made sure. That's right. And then the next
one is for 2022 and that's owned uh by n carlisle street llc
and who's the president of that uh abdell as well yeah and then abdel personally owns
abdell as well yeah and then abdell personally owns 2037 north carlisle street
and then he owns temple casa llc owns
is it here i can't see 2040 oh let me see i put that there 2040 north carlisle street
and then the last one i believe abdel owns personally 2045 carlisle street
and then there are certificates of tax clearance even though they show monies are owed
not owed until march 31st for each of these properties some of them are actually looks
like they're paid with that being said um i would ask that for us uh be sworn in and i'll have a
couple questions for him. Please, can you state your name and spell it for the court? Yes, Faras
Al-Sayed, F-I-R-A-S, Al-Sayed, A-L-S-A-Y-Y-E-D. Do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth,
and nothing but the truth? I do, sir. Counsel, please proceed. Thank you. Faras, you heard
everything I had to state today about this zoning matter. I did. Is it true and correct? Yes. And do
adopt this your own testimony i do specifically you would agree to provide so for commercial trash
pickup yeah sure all right thank you thank you um questions from the board um i have a question so
the buildings that are currently there they will all be demolished to to well not all at the same
time no i mean i mean well they all the ones that i've seen are two stories so are you going to just
tear them down to build a three-story or add a
third-story to? No, we'll
probably get rid of them and
build on you. And that's better as far
as like rodents and everything else.
Okay. And then the other question is, you
said that there were going to be
areas provided for each unit.
So why the need of having the trash
storage under the steps in the front if you
have trash storage for each of the
units? It's dead space.
And what we do is we
use it. We put grills on the front.
it's totally sealed you know rodents can't get in because we you know we have other structures that
we use that example and it fits perfectly you know yeah well i know that's it's a really trashy
area at times and when you have the trash storage in the front sometimes people go beyond that
screen so you know just um and you said that this was not like marketed to student housing
or would be no not at all no yeah i mean i think one of the things we can do and i'm just thinking
it out loud instead of having the grills is maybe having a solid structure that would be locked up
so it's not inviting trash to be you know thrown into that area thank you any other questions from
the board yes um question you said um in the basements you talked about an open floor plan
what do you mean by that most likely washer and dryer storage um well there's a i'm sorry
please pardon the interruption i cannot hear the witness yeah washer and dryer storage um
there's a sump pump downer utilities so the washer and dryer would be available for all the units
no no only for first one or yeah the first but but you have a washer and dryer in each unit just
that the washer and dryer for the first for the unit number one it's in all room yeah we could use
it as you know just as for a washer and dryer oh so is it except maybe i missed this then um
each unit has a washer and dryer okay they do okay yeah and and and unit number one is first
floor and lower level yes okay no legend though right no no yeah and and as for the board to
decide what to do with that uh you know i think we would agree to to no bedrooms in the basement
but what you're planning is a bi-level
sort of unit with respect to the first floor in the basement
so that's what you mean by open floor plan
okay thank you
I was just trying to clarify that there would be no household living in the basement
but it sounds like there is a desire to have
household living in the basement
well i i think it's more so if you have the space why not use it um i don't think it's
we're not putting bedrooms down there but there's no reason not to have you know a separate living
area and especially storage down there like if you want to have it was there anything expressed
at the rco meeting about living in the basement no the only really the biggest push was the fact
No, the only really the biggest push was the fact that we're demolishing five units on that block. And we indicated to them that we would stagger that because we didn't want to be disruptive to that block so that we would do it like every like nine months because we have that period of time from the time that we get the zoning permit until we get the building permit.
that we were demolishing
it's like a four or five year period that you can stretch that out and we said we would even put
that in writing that we wouldn't do that that was their biggest concern was the disruption to the
community of how quickly we're going to build these and we said you know we and what we're
saying on the record here you you you would stagger this development yeah we had no intentions on
you know knocking everything down all at once what is the height of the basement um let me take a
look. And this is just one example. This is, and we can look at each one, but this is 2045
is an example okay so we are that's that's a window that's a window window right here
and we're six feet out of the ground it looks like um from the ground level okay
six feet to the first floor that's right and so that so that so that so what i'm hearing is that
the building that's there will be torn down and this new structure will be built that's right
okay and it's not a character have newer construction of three stories on that block
there's many examples as you saw from the uh views from the left and right of the property
got it any more questions from the board yeah i have another question you said that there were 10
multi-family
properties on this
block?
Is that what you were saying?
And that they were triplexes?
Yes. Do you own any
of those?
On the 2000 block?
I don't think you do. On the 2000 block?
He owns nearby, but
probably a few blocks away.
Okay. Alright. Thank you.
Questions from our attorney, Hillary, and Emerson.
Just a quick clarification.
What is Mr. Al-Sayed's role with the properties?
Because he's not the owner or the president of the LLC.
So I was just a little bit...
Yeah, he's...
My clients are rather shy individuals.
I mean, that's ultimately, you know, what this...
You know, we can have, you know, him speak in the back if you want.
No, I was just asking what his role is.
Oh, no, he's just part...
Yeah, what is your role?
oh yeah we we're like we handle the management so we live in the neighborhood um me and my brother
both live within less than a mile radius like okay so you're really part of the property management
team yeah like about the trash we actually come out and take the trash the only time that block
get dirty is on windy days you know there's nothing much you can do when people take the
trash out it gets windy it flies all over the place but we pretty much handle it there's a
sanitation um department within like a mile away on ridge i mean we know the neighborhood so
no thank you i just want to clarify for the record your your your role thank you
any questions from the audience
any questions from the virtual audience yes mr chair i have a hand up from uh
judith robinson i would allow them to speak thank you uh good afternoon judith robinson
You've already been sworn in. Just state your name for the record, and you have. Please proceed.
Okay. So as I mentioned earlier, I am the representative emeritus of the 32nd Ward RCO.
And over the decade that I've done that work for the 32nd Ward RCO, we always ask for our developers to support cleanliness and waste management in our neighborhood, which is near Temple University, near student housing, etc.
So we ask of everyone.
But over the years, I have to admit, this development team has been the best at supporting our community.
They have a community benefits agreement. I know you all don't like that too much about details of it, but to work with the block captain of that block since 2019 consistently, once we move forward, we don't monitor some of the community benefits agreement, but we can look back on this one and talk to the block captain who encouraged me to attend the RCO meeting, which I did.
And the main issue was, as has been presented, but we were able to abstain because the sanitation plan that these folks have is.
The sanitation plan that these folks have is what we look for in oil development in that area, to be honest.
And that little alcove under the step, which I tell you the truth, we hate, but they even went above and beyond to come up with a better type of screening because rodents were getting in.
And we had a major problem.
We do have a major problem in the area regarding that because the students put out trash in very precarious ways.
I told them about the convenience center on Glenwood Avenue, and they use it.
I mean, I think we could reduce a lot of trash in the neighborhoods if everyone who can use that center uses it.
They could take up to 10 bags of trash.
I don't want to get that deep into that.
But this is what we've been doing since 2005 with our nonprofit organization, Susquehanna Cleanup.
And they have helped us, all the big cleanups, and they go above and beyond based on what we've seen with others.
And I just want to focus in on that area alone because I would like them to really tell other developers how they could better manage sanitation because the mayor's clean and green, big cleanup and all of that.
she's asking us to give us her best give us our best and this is one of perfect examples
of when our developers go above and beyond to really engage with the community and help us
in ways that we need it so thank you so much for that thank you so much mary bribeson for
your testimony uh any other questions in a virtual audience yes i have uh tomahangafatsky
with a hand raised up and got them to speak.
Good afternoon.
Please state your name and spell it for the personographer.
Good afternoon.
My name is Tomo Holovatsky, T-O-M-A,
and the last name is H-O-L-O-V-A-T-S-K-Y-Y.
You agree to tell the truth, the whole truth,
and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Please proceed.
I just would like to, the previous person,
um accidentally underlined the character of umar um if it was and everybody else on the team
they um i myself am a realtor and also and temple alumni i have been uh in temple university area
since 2016 and i personally worked with a lot of developers property owners property management
groups in the area and I just needed to come to this meeting and to attest to the characters of
the property owners that I had the best pleasure working with them all the tenants love them and
I am at Temple University most of the time and I can say 20th block of Carlisle Street is one of
the cleanest and one of the most taken care of blocks in temple university area and they've been
in that area for a very long time have deep roots connections with other property owners there and i
know that one of the owners abdel gallini his he graduated in 1980s or so bought their property
at that time
and has been there ever since
and takes good care of this.
Thank you so much for your testimony.
Anyone else in the virtual audience?
Yes, Hangong Mahdi.
I've allowed them to speak.
Please.
Good afternoon.
Please state your name and spell it for the court sonographer.
Malang Mahdi, please unmute, wait to be sworn in.
Mr. Mahdi, are you there?
You can proceed, Mr. Chair.
Can you please state your name and spell it for the court sonographer?
I'm about to get out of here.
All right, is anyone else out there in a virtual audience?
Mr. Hand?
No, sir.
planning commission
thank you chair michael gall with the philadelphia city planning commission
the comprehensive plan recommends no change to the special purpose institutional zoning at this
location the appellant has demonstrated that the underlying zoning of these properties none of
which are part of the associated institutional master plan is appropriate to the character and
physical circumstances of this fully residential block therefore the city planning commission
recommends the board grant the requested variances for occupied lot area and multi-family residential
use okay i'm going to put all of these together uh number seven m i that
Okay, I'm going to vote all of these together. Number seven, MI-2024-0098, excuse me,
006-899, 2045, North Carlisle Street. Number eight, MI-2024-006900, 2016, North Carlisle
Street, MI-2024-006902, 2022, North Carlisle Street, number 12, MI-2024-006917, 2037, North
Carlisle Street, and number 13, MI-2024-006919, 2040, North Carlisle Street.
my vote is yes
with a proviso
storage
there was different
between the floors if I recall
correctly that was proposed but a commercial
trash pickup was requested
commercial trash pickup
and we include no household living in the
basement
and no household living in the basement
Michael John, I vote yes with provisor.
Cheryl Gaston, I voted yes with provisor.
Tanetta Graham, my vote is yes with provisor.
Thank you.
Excuse me.
Can we need to re-vote that?
Because if you're voting for all five, you need to say yes to all.
I'm sorry about that.
Do you want to run all the addresses again?
No, we can just re-vote all of what we just re-voted.
yes. My vote is yes to all five
with proviso.
basement living as well as
the trash storage pickup.
Yeah, it's no household living in the basement
and commercial trash pickup. Yes.
John, my vote is yes
with proviso. To all
with proviso. Thank you.
Cheryl Gaston, my vote is yes
to all with proviso.
Sonetta Graham, my vote is yes to all
with proviso. Thank you.
Have a great night.
Number 10, MI-2024-006-905, 512 East Cabot Street.
Cabot Street.
Erica Miller?
They're coming back in this panel, sir.
Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman and Board. Erica Miller with Obermeyer.
Good afternoon. Can you spell your name for the court's sonographer, please?
Erica, E-R-I-K-A, Miller, M-I-L-L-E-R.
Swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
Can you please identify your client?
Yeah, so I'm here for 512 East Cabot Street.
My client is Marianne Tempone, and Justin cites they are the owners of the property.
Okay. My board member, Mrs. Graham, had additional questions for you.
Good afternoon. Have you emailed all the required documents
and exhibits needed to proceed with this case five days prior to this hearing?
I have. Okay. And do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal
and stipulate to its accuracy? Yes. Okay. Thank you.
You may proceed.
All right.
Are you able to see my screen? Yes. That is the schedule. Okay. I did request to present both my cases this afternoon consecutively for 512 and East Cabot. So I'm not sure if that was granted by the board, but just as a forewarning for when I do get to 514 East Cabot, they are substantially similar.
similar so and in terms i know that this meeting is running a little bit late so in terms of
process i'm happy to kind of breeze right through but right so 512 east cabot um like i mentioned
the owners are marion tampon and justin sites we are seeking front a compact front yard parking
space for their property this is in a rsa 5 zoning district which does not permit front yard parking
As you can see, we have the refusal here that says just that, as well as the refusal for prohibiting front-yard parking in the front-yard setback.
As I mentioned, it's in the RSA 5 zoning district.
You can see here that we are abutting the rear properties.
Counsel, I have one question.
I didn't mean to interrupt, but are you talking about both properties right now or just 512?
512. I'm just talking about 512. I'm happy, and that's kind of what I wanted to do consecutively
I'm just talking about 512.
I just want to keep on.
I'm happy.
so that I could, I didn't have to repeat, but it's up to you guys. Right now, it's just 512.
Ms. Miller, we will go to 514 right after this, and to the extent applicable, you can incorporate
your testimony from this matter into that matter as well. I would love to, yes, and my clients for
that are Timothy Scales and Alexandra I always mispronounce her name and they
should hopefully all four of my clients are on the call so we can have them
adopt my testimony later but for now 512 is that is that okay I'll keep going
yes okay so right like right I mentioned 512 is right here it's about see the
rear yards of all these properties on Palmer this is another view of the
property this property suffered a fire that there was a row of four properties
here my clients are at the end here 512 at the very end a property this property
suffered a severe fire that caused demolition of all four properties you
can see that the properties were demolished here here are the photos
before the fire of what the properties looked like from the other angle this is
night of the fire the demolition from the fire and then this is the rebuild as you can see in the
initial photograph looking towards palmer the next yard the next door neighbor is set back
quite a way so when they rebuilt they rebuilt in alignment with that
neighbor so as you can see all four properties are now in alignment
properties 516 and 518 East Cabot were recently granted front yard parking
substantially similar to this these applications here and very similar
application and similar properties here are the plans you can see this was the
lot when it was cleared after the fire and then here are the general specs for
the parking. We are requesting compact parking. It should be noted that on the side of the
street of Cabot where my client has their property, there is no street parking. So if
this board were to grant this application, it would not take away any street parking
spaces because there is none permitted on their side of the street. You can see that
exemplified here where it says existing parking and then the turning into my client's property.
This is a letter in support from the RCO. They supported both properties for their front yard parking.
This front yard parking is very, very common on this street.
This is just the block of East Cabot from Palmer to Montgomery and as you can see there are 14 off street parking spaces.
the ones directly next to our property including 516 and 518 that this board
granted in 2024 all have front yard front yard parking some of these on the
other side are garage parking nonetheless it is very common in this
area again these two properties have front yard parking now I have more
photos later that I can exemplify these are the properties next door this was
during the reconstruction of the fire after the fire so you can see the blue
other nearby front yard parking streets department has approved a curb cut for
the parking in front and no issues were presented there so remember my own law I
won't bore you with that and but I'm happy to go into our legal argument as
well besides what I've already presented. The application, the PIF, we notified our neighbors
and posted the property. And actually on these postings you can see the front yard a little bit
better. I think these two really show. So these two properties were recently permitted or recently
granted variances for this same request this is 512 and the next was 514 this is
the tax clearance for 512 and the deed as well so that's our presentation I'd
love for if my clients Marianne tampon and Justin are still on I'd love them
to be granted permission to adopt my testimony or can we promote the client please
please
justin teats will be coming back in as a panel shortly thank you
at the moment you state your name and spell it for the personographer
there he had done
dustin sites is on as well
j-u-s-t-i-n-s-e-i-t-z
you swear to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth
i do please proceed council
Hi, Justin. Were you present for my presentation that I showed just now?
I was, yes.
And would you accept and adopt that testimony as your own?
Yes, I would.
Is there anything that you'd like to add that I might have missed?
No, no, I think you covered it.
Okay, great. I will open up my client and myself to questions from the board.
Thank you. Questions from the board?
questions from our attorney hillary emerson not at this time mr chair questions from the audience
questions from the virtual audience i have a hand up sir from uh robert everett i've allowed them
to speak. Mr. Everett, good afternoon. Mr. Everett, are you there? Mr. Everett, are you
still present? Is anyone else out there in the virtual audience?
All the hands raised, Mr. Chair.
For the record, Mr. Everett is the RCO lead. And I would guess that he would be
saying that he's in support as the letter indicates.
Yes, I figured that. See, just trying to give him a second. Can't get in. We'll go ahead and move on to the Planning Commission.
thank you chair michael gall with the city planning commission the comprehensive plan
recommends no change to the residential single family zoning at this location there is no unique
physical condition of this property that would prevent it from being used in strict conformance
with the zoning code the city planning commission recommends that the board deny the proposed use
variance for an accessory off street parking space excess from a primary street we would also note
for the board that if a space is approved there is no mechanism that the city has which can limit
the owner to only parking a compact vehicle in this location okay so we're going to actually
take this one back to executive session we'll be meeting on this and we'll vote on it next week at
two o'clock thank you council while we have you we're going to just jump we got one more case for
you yep number 17 uh mi-2024 006 965 514 east cabot street great uh thank you board again erica
miller from overmeyer on behalf of timothy scales and alexandra for 514 east cabot substantially
the same as the 512 presentation in terms of especially because that this property and the
512 have the same dimensions as well as the same dimensions for the parking requested although
despite that you might notice that this refusal looks slightly different and we've chalked that
up to we had we've had different zoning examiners come out with essentially the same refusals but
just put slightly differently this again is the refusal for front street for accessory parking
and then the front er dimensional refusals as well it all ends up being the same it's not permitted
So we are here requesting a variance for such a thing.
I would, just to mention what the Planning Commission, their concerns are, is this, it's our opinion that these properties are unique in the sense that we had every intention of rebuilding on the current,
the foundation that you see here being flush with the street foregoing any parking
and contributing to street parking in this area which we all know is very over
And contributing to street parking in this area, which we all know is very over parked. So this, this, these applications would actually really help that issue in this area. And despite my clients basically wanting to move back into the homes that they very sadly lost in this fire and rebuild and restart, they were unable to because they had to, they had to comply with building code that set them back in the
alignment with their neighboring properties that were granted like i mentioned before front yard
parking in the exact same manner um include theirs were for compact parking as well i'd like to
mention that were granted by this board not long ago so yes um again i'm just kind of quickly going
through this these are the same dimensions um this is one lot over again no parking on this side of
street compact parking is our request in order to allow for an easier turning radius i know my
clients i i know especially for 512 they own a small car they have no intention of not complying
with the compact parking space and i think most people that live in this area own compact cars
because of how tight the roads are again the RCO supported this application again
there are nearby properties streets approval for the curb cut our notice our
posting our memorandum of law our application our PIF and our appeal and
the deed this tax clearance was separate so if timothy or alexandra um are in the audience i'd
love to have them come on and adopt my testimony
timothy scales will be rejoining as a panel shortly
hello timothy scales c-i-m-o-t-h-y s-c-a-l-e-s
i think the board has questions uh do you swear to tell the truth the whole truth
nothing but the truth i do so swear mr chairman please proceed council hi tim um were you present
for the testimony i just presented yes were you here were you here for the testimony that i
presented for 512 east cabot your neighbor yes i was would you you know generally adopt the
testimony from that presentation into this one in the sense that i um you know mesh them somewhat
yes I would and then therefore the testimony that I gave specifically for
your property agreed yes I would was there anything I missed that you would
like to add for the board at this time no I would not thank you you did a great
job thanks yeah I think that's all we have board and mr. chairman thank you
thank you very much council questions from the board questions from our
attorney hillary emerson not at this time mr chair questions from the audience any questions
from the virtual audience i'm here mr bob everett's hand is raised again okay he's been about to speak
i believe we received a letter for this as well and in favor of from the rcl
So we do have that on the record, Ms. Edwards, although we can't hear you.
Planning Commission.
Thank you again, Chair.
Michael Gall with the Philadelphia City Planning Commission.
The comprehensive plan recommends no change to the residential single-family zoning at this location.
There is no unique physical condition or circumstance of this property that would prevent it from being used in conformance with the zoning code.
The City Planning Commission therefore recommends the board deny the proposed use variants for an accessory off-street parking space accessed from the primary street.
And as with the last case, we also note for the board that if a space is approved, there is no mechanism that the city has which can limit the owner to only parking a contact vehicle in this location.
Again, we'll actually hold this vote as well until next week at 2 o'clock.
We'll take it to executive session for further discussion.
Thank you.
Thank you, counsel.
and thank you for this the record is closed on both the record is closed on both
i appreciate the opportunity thank you
MI-2024-006922-7801 Oxford Street, Ron Patterson.
282-7801 Oxford Street, Ron Patterson.
Mr. Patterson, good evening.
Your name is Bella for the court sonographer.
Good evening, Ronald Patterson, R-O-N-A-L-D.
P-A-T-T-E-R-S-O-N.
You spread the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
You identify your client?
I represent the owner and developer of the property's BG Oxford Avenue, LLC.
Thank you.
Our board member, Mrs. Graham, has a few additional questions for you.
Good afternoon.
Have you emailed all the required documents and exhibits needed to proceed with this case five days prior to this hearing?
Yes, I have.
And do you agree to wait with the reading
that a refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Yes, I do.
Thank you. You may proceed.
Thank you.
So, again, good evening.
So this application regards 7801 Oxford Avenue,
and you'll see on the pictures,
it's in the Fox Chase section of the city,
and it actually consists of three parcels.
It's bordered by Oxford Avenue,
and to the right on this photograph,
you see it's a Scepter Rail Train,
Um, tracks, um, let's see here.
So this is important to note because in that parking area, you'll see that the, the train tracks are elevated, but properties to the left.
and as you go to the right of the train tracks the elevation drops severely and this is important to
note as we get into the setback refusals that uh we're we're requesting so just some more photographs
of the area oxford avenue uh property currently consists of three parcels and this part first
part of this application is is to uh combine consolidate the lots to create one lot from three
the current uses are open area here which is used for tractor trailer storage
and auto body repair uh shop here on this building here um auto body and fender and as we go further
down over here open area is a propane refilling facility
This is a site plan survey showing existing conditions, Oxford Avenue below, the train tracks above, and the existing buildings.
so what we're proposing today it's currently it's located in an i1 industrial uh zoning district
um the uses as i mentioned uh that it exists kind of conflict with the area because you saw
pictures there's residential across the street it's a peculiarly shaped property as you see
It's triangular, and it makes it very challenging to develop a building with right angles and to make a building that actually is viable and functions appropriately.
So consolidate the lots to create one lot of 33,679 square feet, about 0.77 acres.
Our proposal is to build, or was to build, because I'll get to that shortly, a one six-story building to be used as a self-storage facility.
That use is permitted as a matter of right, along with six parking spaces and six loading spaces with interior landscaping, exterior landscaping trees and a brick wall fence, we'll call it along Oxford Avenue.
Here's a refusal letter. As I mentioned, the use was permitted as a matter of right. We received three refusals for setbacks, not being able to meet the setbacks.
And again, because the property is triangular, very difficult to meet, and we'll have testimony about that, but we feel that the setbacks provided are sufficient, as we'll hear.
um typically in in an eye zoning district the far is 500 but there's an overlay that
reduces the allowable far to 225 and we were proposing 351 so there was a refusal issued for
that uh 60 spaces were required based on the square footage of the building 118 000 square
feet and we were providing six spaces so we met with the fox chase civic association on january
8th and at that meeting which was quite long we came to a resolution that we were going to
reduce the building by cutting it in half i'll show you a new rendering of that
that was the original and this is the proposed
so uh the three stories uh brought the the height from 60 feet of compliant all the way down to 30
feet um brought the building again to three stories it reduced the far to a compliant far
and what i did for your edification here is i took the liberty to write on
a refusal showing you what the changes would be that the new far would be a hundred and seventy
percent uh the grocery area fifty nine thousand sixty one square feet the allowable the required
parking spaces reduced to 30 but we were still asking for six um because of the square footage
involved which was greater than fifty thousand square feet because there are more residential
a residential district across the street it did had to go to civic design review
which we completed earlier this month um and so based upon uh the comments we received from the
rco and uh civic design review we incorporated that into this new design that i was showing you
and um with that said i would state that the peculiar configuration of the property and
applicable zoning the existing and surrounding uses creates a hardship to design dimensionally
a building that would conform the dimensional provisions of the code and be viable yet we
believe that the dimensional setbacks as you'll see that we're proposing will cause and create
no detrimental impacts on the public health safety welfare and traffic so with that said
that first witness would be mr dan market thanks for having me absolutely please state your name
is spelled for the court sonographer dan market d-a-n-m-a-r-k-e-t you tell you spread the truth
the whole truth and nothing but the truth yes thank you dan by whom are you employed
bg capital and what's your position there vice president of uh construction operations and
business development okay so you're intimately familiar with the project yes okay uh you've
heard my presentation would you agree it's true and accurate yes and you would adopt it as if it
were your own. Yes. You want to just briefly describe the proposed use of a self-storage
facility, how many units, how it would function? So right now we're at around 502 units. And what
that allows, it's climate controlled and allow individuals to come into the facility. We have
a loading zone. They'll enter the building, use the elevators to go up, drop off our storage,
come out and leave again. And what are the hours of operation? Generally from around 9 a.m. to 6
p.m okay and it's true we've agreed to reduce the building by reducing it in half size all our new
designs have a stronger building by three four three stories okay thank you that's all i have
for mr market anyone else yeah yes okay thank you sir thank you apologize for holding you up
all day no worries we'll get through this gotta get through it uh kate uh tell the board your name
an address please press that button on good evening good evening katherine weiss with dynamic
engineering located in philadelphia 1515 market street suite 1920 you spell your name for the
court sonographer please katherine weiss k-a-t-h-e-r-i-n-e weiss w-e-i-s-s
swear to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth i do please proceed counts
thank you okay what's your occupation civil engineer licensed professional civil engineer
in pennsylvania new jersey and you prepared the zoning site plans for this project yes that's
And you prepared the zoning site plans for this project?
Yes, that's correct.
Correct.
And would you say the property has a peculiar configuration?
And challenging to locate a building on the property?
Yes, both based on shape and the grade change throughout the site and at the rear of the property.
Okay. And that peculiar configuration resulted in the challenge of how to locate the building within the property lines, which then created the refusals for setbacks that we saw earlier, correct?
Correct.
You would like to comment on them?
Yes. So walking through the front yard setback, 20 feet is required, and 17.3 is provided. It may also be worth noting that the existing nonconformity includes a building that is at the property line or over it at the front of the property.
In addition, it's not uncharacteristic in the neighborhood for buildings to be at the property line.
And so this left side yard, as you see, it varies. So there would be no way to putting a squared off building to comply with the setbacks for the entire length of the property line. Is that correct?
Correct. And at the back rear corner, we're providing a setback of five feet where 12 is required. But as you move forward towards the front of the property, that setback increases. And again, as Ron mentioned, that's needed to keep a square corner for the building.
And on the rear, we want to comment on the rear setback.
So the rear setback, 12 feet is required and two feet is provided.
And was it accurate?
And those pictures were accurately represented that were boarded by a railroad and then the elevation dropped substantially beyond that?
Correct.
And would that act as a buffer, would you say?
You want to comment on, well, let's talk about the parking.
So, the required number of parking spaces is based on having one space for every 2,000 square feet of, we'll call it, building or warehouse area.
Would that be fair to say?
Correct.
And that's for wholesale distribution and storage uses, which, quite frankly, doesn't contemplate self-storage type.
And is there an industry standard for calculating or choosing how many spaces you would need for a self-storage facility?
so the institute of transportation um engineers known as ite is a national standard
that identifies a peak parking demand of 0.1 spaces per 1 000 which equates to one space
per 10 000 square feet of building area based on an approximate and under 60 000 square foot building
the size of this building six parking spaces would be required in addition we're providing
six loading spaces, which is more than double what the national standard recommends for
this size of a self-storage building. And the parking and loading, as you see in this picture,
are behind this masonry fence wall? Correct. So we're meeting the required screening
as part of the landscape requirements. And the loading spaces are located along the front of
the building? Correct. And they can also be used as parking. How would they be used?
Yes. So most typical storage users, they may be coming to set up a unit, they can use the parking spaces, or if they're coming to bring items or pickup items, they can use the loading spaces or parking interchangeably.
And let me ask you, would these setbacks have any detrimental impacts on the public health, safety, welfare, or traffic, or traffic circulation?
Okay. Thank you.
Thank you, counsel. Anyone else?
Yeah, one more question.
Sure, thank you.
i joke tell the board your name and address please uh joe davidson busy architecture uh
10 000 um atlantic drive marlton new jersey state can you spell it for the question yes uh joseph
j-o-s-e-p-h-d-a-v-i-d-s-o-n you swear to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth
i do counts until you were involved in the design of the building yes and up on the screen now is
the original design is that correct that is correct and if you compare and contrast it to
what we arrived at could you could you tell us briefly what the changes were
and that they were in accordance with the rco and cdr comments yeah so the rco um meeting at fox
chase um was uh based on the height of the building was really uh out of character for
the neighborhood so the owner decided to cut the three floors which has been spoken about um
they also had brought up some concern about the materials of the building um and then at this
about the materials of the building um and then at the civic design review there was a request to
try to get some more glazing uh in the facade which is challenging in a storage building and
down this area too we're on yeah so we added at stair towers elevator lobbies we added some
glazing to help break up the facade we also picked materials that were a little more in
character with the neighborhood uh there is quite a bit of mix of materials down um oxford street
but we brought some brick in some some muted tan colors and also varied uh some of the textures
and the materials to create a little bit more um scale of the building
great thank you that's all i have thank you can't let's look and what i'm showing here on the on
the screen are three proviso conditions that the RCO had requested, and that's in their
letter that's attached in our exhibits.
And I believe BG Capital already signed off as the client.
Oh, yes, that's correct.
Oh, and so I would mention, too, that I did submit an application for approval of revised
zoning plans that reflects the three-story building.
Questions from the board?
yeah this are there any retail sales of storage materials at one site say your
name again please day market hey what was the question are there any retail
sales of storage materials moving materials on site no okay thank you
other questions yeah so this is just self-storage this is people who need
extra storage space and they bring things there so i guess i heard that the hours of operation
were going to be like nine to five years yeah it's not it's not open 24 hours correct so you
have to on the door normal business hours and that's when it will be open and not not locked
is that fair to say correct right you can't go in there middle of the night no you have no access
You have access during their operating hours, and that's it.
And operating hours are?
Generally 9 to 6, 9 a.m. to 6 p.m.
And that's Monday through Friday?
Monday through Friday.
How about Saturday?
Some are open on Saturday as well, yes, 9 to 6.
It depends on the operator we end up dealing with as well.
Oh, okay.
They may run it or there may be a flag, so we're not really sure right now.
All right.
Thank you.
You're welcome.
So the times are not locked in until you actually sign someone up as the operator, am I right?
Correct.
But general operation throughout the country is 9 a.m. to 6 p.m.
Fair enough.
Yeah, we didn't want to have it like it's not what you would think of open garages where you can just drive in at any time, any day, any night.
It's in an enclosed building, obviously.
Questions from our attorney, Hillary Emerson?
um uh just to to clarify i noticed the refusal that you you annotated to show us the changes
that one was dated 1023 but the other refusal was dated 1028 was there like a second refusal
issued for some reason i don't think so but we look the same to me but it looked like there
were two different ones so i would just i i i annotated that yeah no no that's fine no that's
fine. No, I just noticed that that one was dated 1020. Yeah, I don't know. Regular one was or the
other one was the 28. I don't recall I would go with a later date. There might have been a typo
in it or something. Okay. All right. Yes, I will just note that to the board that in in voting on
this case that it's per refusal dated 102824. Any questions from the audience?
questions from the virtual audience yes mr chair i have a hand up from kate friend i have allowed
her to speak hi this is kate friend hello miss friend can you please state shanae what you
state can you spell it for the court stenographer k-a-t-e f-r-i-e-n-d you swear to tell the truth
the whole truth and nothing but the truth? Yes, I do. Please proceed. I'm the president of
Fox Chase Civic Association and I just wanted to verify for the record that BG Capital's
intention is to build this building that they are presenting. Yes. Thank you. You're currently on it?
You're going to build it.
Regardless of who operates it?
Correct.
Thank you.
No problem.
Any other questions out there?
I'll break your audience.
i see no further hands mr chair planning commission
I see no further hands, Mr. Chair.
Planning Commission.
thank you chair michael gall with the philadelphia city planning commission
the comprehensive plan recommends no change to the i1 industrial zoning at this location
the appellant has demonstrated that the proposed changes in most dimensions would not have a
detrimental impact on the area beyond what is expected and the parking requirement in the base
zoning is far more than is necessary for this proposed use therefore the city planning commission
recommends the board grant the requested variances for front yard depth side yard width rear yard
depth and required parking thank you mi-2024-006-922-7801 oxford avenue my vote is yes
per amended refuser dated 10 28 2004. and also one page of revised plans stamped by zba on february
26-2025.
And also one page of
Michael Johnson, my vote is yes
with Provisors.
Cheryl Gaston, my vote is yes
with Provisors.
Tanetta Graham, my vote is yes with Provisors.
Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Patterson.
You're welcome.
Good evening.
MI-2024-006
947-1604
chestnut street brett feldman council attorney
good evening good evening mr feldman please state your name and spell it for the court
sonographer yes brett feldman 18 b-r-e-t-t feldman f-e-l-d-m-a-n swear to all truth the
whole truth and nothing but the truth i do uh you identify your client sure um i represent
That's McDonald's Corporation with Alexander Ortiz, who is McDonald's area construction manager.
Okay, thank you.
Board member Mrs. Grant has additional questions for you.
Good evening.
Have you emailed all the required documents and exhibits needed to proceed with this case five days prior to this hearing?
I have.
Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and do you stipulate to its accuracy?
Okay, thank you.
you can proceed great great so again brett feldman 1835 market street i represent mcdonald's
in this application this is an application for a new mcdonald's restaurant at 1604 chestnut street
this would be a replacement for the former mcdonald's that was on the 1700 block of walnut
street that was lost in a fire in 2020 and alex and his team at mcdonald's have been working
for the past four or five years to bring McDonald's back into Center City, and that's what this
application is all about. I'm joined by my colleague Andrea Salmon, as well as Thomas
Kribel, who is our project engineer from Bowler Engineering. We've passed up exhibits one through
19, which had asked to be incorporated into the record. So at this late hour, I will try to get
right to it here. Thank you, thank you, thank you.
We've worked closely with the Community Group Center City Residents Association.
You see at Exhibit Tab 2, Exhibit Tab 1, a letter of non-opposition from CCRA.
In there are a number of provisos concerning location of our trash storage, which is the
inside of the restaurant.
Trash will be accessed in the rear from Stock Exchange Place,
and it also provides the hours for the trash storage.
There's also conditions in that letter regarding that all deliveries will also be made in that rear alley
no earlier than 7 a.m. on weekdays or 8 a.m. on weekends.
And also, we were very careful to talk about we have a new pretty high-tech scrubbing
for any eventing that comes from the restaurant.
Those are all in those, and that provides a letter,
and we will agree to that if the board agrees to support this.
We actually also work closely with the Art Commission
on the signage package that you'll see today.
Wanted to make sure we vetted this as much as possible with all the different city agencies before we came here.
Wanted to make sure we vetted this as much as possible
with all the different city agencies before we came here.
So the signage you'll see has been approved already by the Philadelphia Art Commission.
And the letters of approval from our commission are at Exhibit Tab 2.
Exhibit Tab 3, this is a special exception case.
It's not a variance case.
And we believe, as the testimony will establish, that this restaurant, any impacts that come from this restaurant would not be any more, would not be substantially more than you would expect from a takeout restaurant.
This doesn't have a drive-thru.
This doesn't have parking.
It's an in-line store.
We were here four or five months ago, Alex and I, on a location on North Broad Street.
We talked a lot about the drive-thru and parking lot.
I think at some point you shut me off and said, we're done with this, but this is a different,
this is an in-line store. Just real quick, I think we all know there was the location on the 1700
block of Walnut Street that was lost. Let's turn that around here. And as I said, we've been
working closely. This is some of the articles that were in the paper about returning to Center
city. This was an article that was in the paper about a month or two ago about McDonald's returning
to 1604 Chestnut Street. And here is that article. And so I'll get right to it.
That's the location on the 1600 block of Chestnut Street. It was
Portobello men's store. I think it was a Payless shoe store before there is a really cute,
quaint little building um that is in need of a lot of work um it it all new systems uh new roof
mcdonald's will be uh going above and beyond as far as investing in the infrastructure of that
building to make sure that it uh remains um and and it really contributes historically uh to center
city um just real quick here's what it looks like from the outside i think we're probably familiar
with it. As you go down, there's a bus stop right outside. That's the inside. Here's our posting
that we did on the property in the front. That's in the rear of the property.
And the property goes all the way from Chestnut Street back to Stock Exchange.
And here's what it would look like. Again, it's a really mild sign package that has already been
vetted and approved by the art commission. I have some examples of actually what those signs
will look when they're actually put up at the 40th and Walnut Street location. But there's really
no changes to the exterior of the building other than the signage and some TLC on the front to
make sure that that maintains stability. This is the floor plan of the restaurant. And I'm just
going to ask um alex uh ortiz um who is if you give your title you state your name as fellow
for the court with a semiographer yes alexander ortiz o-r-t-i-z you spread the title truth the
whole truth and nothing but the truth i do please proceed and i know you have a big title but you
are responsible for the construction up and down the east coast well area construction manager i'm
responsible for mid-atlantic construction so mid-atlantic all throughout the region um but
you all you grew up in philadelphia i'm from philly uh yeah so i'm excited to be partnering
with the city on bringing mcdonald's back in um we lost our location a few years ago we've gotten
complaints from a lot of our customers hey there's no options for sort of you know reasonable price
breakfast or a good coffee that's cheap you know so we've gotten that feedback from our customers
and we're hoping we can partner with the city and bring this back and we're already in front of the
board on another location on broad street right so just briefly um what's exciting about this is
it's a new prototype um i think there's just finished at 40th and walnut but i don't know
if you just want to walk the board through just briefly and there's internal trash storage with
as per the you got it you got it so just alex if you really could just quickly just talk about
some of the high points of the floor plan here sure thing this is what we call an in-line um
restaurant and the goal in inline basically means it's in the city it's an urban location
we don't have a drive-through obviously we don't have parking most of the building is actually the
kitchen the blue section that you see there's all kitchen you see kitchen equipment and then you see
a manager's office and you'll see some cold storage and a freezer and then behind that is
kind of is our trash handling area so that whole section in blue is really all devoted to making
with the sandwiches and burgers and the um fries for our customers the green uh area highlighted
there is the transaction counter it's our front counter it's they call it the service area that's
where our our crew members attend to the folks who come to order and then that kind of uh salmon
colored or you know rng color is the the dining room um the exciting thing about this one is
Dining room. The exciting thing about this one is it is the latest and greatest in terms of
it is the latest thing
technology. We have touchscreen ordering. We have connection with Uber Eats and also ordering
through the app. So you'll see a lot less cash handling in transactions. People are ordering
and paying well in advance of coming to the location. They walk in, show a number on their
phone, and they pick up their food. So it's a lot quicker transaction, a lot less cash handling,
and it's the latest and greatest in terms of McDonald's technology.
okay and i can just point out the internal trash storage yeah yeah so that you put in the back
there you've got your uh trash storage area is kind of that l up upside down l-shaped blue you
know right above the uh stairwell to the basement there right here yeah and then you'll have
additionally there's some storage in the basement for dry storage and for dry items as well um but
typically the way trash will be handled is it's it's broken down and sorted immediately as it
comes in. So anything that is any cardboard or anything like that that comes in is broken down
and sorted for recycling. Any trash is packed up into larger bags and then taken out into a covered
trash container. And with McDonald's, we don't wait for trash day. We actually have a scheduled
multiple week pickup of trash to just avoid the buildup of trash. And all trash will be inside
the restaurant and the um it will go out the back onto stock exchange place and into um trucks to
take it correct the trash will be inside for sort of sorting and then go outside into a a closed a
self-closing trash bin and then from there the trash trucks will come by and pick them up okay
great and you heard the um the center city residents as far as the conditions they put on
what time yes and we will comply with the time for trash pickup and we will comply with the time
for food deliveries as well great i'm just going to just flip through here um this is the sign
package it's been approved by the art commission can you just uh describe what what uh you see here
this is um our newest philadelphia project that was just completed on the university of pennsylvania
campus uh 40th and 40th and walnut yes yeah yeah and uh it's just a really beautiful building
corner um we've got the latest and greatest and basically what we're proposing for this location
would match yeah this is this is what yeah you know sign package even interior decor package
that's the same sign package correct basically yeah we wouldn't have the metal panels here we
would just have the logo and the word mark yeah um but yeah and then just inside how it operates
yeah and inside you can see it's not kind of the mcdonald's that we grew up with you know the
plastic seats and everything some people miss it but this is more of um you know kind of an
upscale experience for center city mcdonald's came a long way what's that i said mcdonald's
came a long way yeah yeah well we had to customers wanted something different so we had to you know
meet the needs of the customers and that's the touch screen there that we're talking about where
a lot of the ordering takes place right there yeah and literally half of our um transactions
are either credit card or on um via app application yep exactly okay i'll just look
to this real quick just the inside yep that's at night at that location which is really brought a
lot of vitality to that corner i understand it great and now you also heard my testimony prior
to your testimony correct i did uh and you was it uh accurate and truthful yes and you adopted
your own i do is there anything further you'd like to add at this point um no okay council
can you go back to the drones please yeah sure uh so there's no there's not going to be any
restroom in the back area uh for staff that's that's correct we what we have is um the men's
and women's restroom out in the uh main lobby area yeah all right so is there going to be a
separate station for uh rinsing hands and whatnot absolutely yeah so we um we what you see in the
back we have a uh standard three compartment sink with wash rinse sanitized okay and then we also
have hand sinks built into that main area there's other hand sinks outside right away correct yeah
basically every station usually requires a hand sink so that's kind of what we do to match any
other questions from the board so what's going on here on the um no back to that plane so this is
the first floor where the blue and the green and the pink are yes what's this on the is that
additional seating and what have you no there is no second floor yeah it's not going to be a second
no yeah our scope will be first floor and just basement for for dry storage okay and we're not
doing anything to the upper floors it just it's it's challenging to have so it's just the same
thing it's just with no it's blown up yeah no colors yes i realized you weren't gonna be able
it'd be tough to read so we tried to color code it to make it a little bit easier to understand
in here and so how much seating are you uh going to have i believe we're at in that
And so how much seating are you going to have?
I believe we're at, in that layout, approximately 22, somewhere in that range.
Let me see, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, 20, 16, 26, 26, 28.
So somewhere between 22 and 28.
This is like a preliminary idea of the layout.
It certainly wouldn't be more seats.
It would most likely be a little less just to make it – because our decor plans are usually developed after the fact.
And when you talked about the touchscreen and then you said something about – did I hear DoorDash?
Did I –
So Uber Eats and DoorDash is a huge part of our business.
And it's just with the younger generations using technology, using their phones, and using the McDonald's app, they get special pricing and special deals.
so a lot of the um offers will be made through uber eats and all that and typically we'll have
so a location like this you could have runners for example people who come from uber who come
by and pick it up and drop it off the nearby apartment complex or you might have someone
on a bike for example who kind of comes by and um and picks up an order and then takes it to their
their uh delivers it to the client wow so it's more takeout than it is really for eating well
but i think it's we're set up for both i think it's going to vary depending on the time time of
day season um i think some some folks may use the entire internal um dining room for example
lunch a good a good opportunity for those who work in the area who want an inexpensive lunch
they may come in and sit and sit inside some folks who are waiting for the bus may come and
make a quick order and take some food with them it so it really is we can sort of predict but not
really we kind of have to see how the customer you know adjust and so that's why we wanted to
make sure we had a dining room as well we didn't want to make it just take out because there are
a ton of customers who like to come in in the morning and sit and have their coffee and stuff
like that so all right thank you yeah you're welcome great any other questions from the board
questions from my attorney hillary emerson um just briefly just the only while it has eating
and drinking establishments on it it does specify takeout restaurant so i think that's what's how
alan i is looking at it currently so i just wanted to be clear on that um and then you referenced
the signage was that that's separate zoning application i have not submitted we've not
submitted for zoning yet okay we did in case the question came up our commission approval yeah okay
i just want to clarify because i didn't see it on this application you're right and the signage is
is full it would be fully code compliant but we weren't going to do that until unless we got the
approval and i would just say as far as a special exception i think um you know we we are in
compliance with 14 3037 um there's no impacts here um that you would that would be any more
than you would expect from a takeout restaurant as far as congestion in public streets or
transportation we don't have a drive-thru we don't have a parking lot overcrowding the land
we're not adding any additions to the building um impairing an adequate supply of light and air
to adjacent property. Again, we're not increasing the size of the building. We're actually
making sure that this building gets preserved because it really does need some work.
Permanently enduring the use of adjacent conforming properties. Again, supporting this building
and working closely on operational issues. And I think we're fully in compliance with the rest
of the standard. And we do have a zoning memorandum at 19 that goes through this and provides further
the substantiation but i think i'll stop there at seven o'clock or wherever we are tonight
thank you we'll be going home before we go i also have uh thomas kreebel who is our project
engineer i guess if you could just adopt my testimony real quick sure thank you please state
your name as fellow for the court of synagogues uh thomas kreebel a r i e b e l you swear to tell
truth the whole truth and never meant the truth i did please proceed counsel uh mr cribley uh who
are you employed by uh i'm employed by bowler engineering okay and you were the project
engineer on this project correct i'm the lead design engineer okay and you heard uh my testimony
yes uh and was it uh truthful and accurate yes and you adopted as your own i do great i have
no further questions thank you council uh any other questions from the audience or the virtual audience
i do not see any hands mr chair planning commission
thank you chair michael gall with the city planning commission the comprehensive plan
recommends no change to the cmx 5 commercial mixed use zoning at this location within the
center city overlaid the proposed use is permitted in this zoning district with special exception
approval from the zoning board the proposed special exception exception is de minimis and
will not cause adverse impacts of this location beyond what can be expected therefore the city
Therefore, the City Planning Commission recommends the board grant the requested special exception for takeout restaurant use.
planning commission recommends the board grant the requested special exception for a takeout
Thank you.
MI-2024-006947-1604 Chestnut Street.
My vote is yes with proviso, interior trash storage, commercial trash pickup, trash pickup, and deliveries to occur in rear alley.
My vote is yes with provisos.
Cheryl Gaston, my vote is yes
with Provisors
Tanetta Graham, my vote is yes with Provisors
Thank you, sir
Thank you for your time and consideration
Hope to be back here on some more McDonald's cases
We welcome McDonald's back to Philly
MI-2024-006914
910-914 Welder Street
David Orpani
Councilman?
Is Mr. Orphanese
in the virtual order?
Yes, sir. He'll be promoted
to panel of assorting.
Good evening.
Good evening. Can you state your name
to spell it for the court scenographer certainly my name is david orphanides last name is spelled
o-r-p-h-a-n-i-d-e-s where to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth i do
you please identify your client my client is gian paulo gian paulo lucci and he's the owner of 9 10
to 14 uh wilder street thank you um our board member um miss graham has some additional questions
for you. Sure. Thank you. I'm sorry. Have you emailed all the required documents and exhibits
needed to proceed with this case five days prior to this hearing? We submitted everything except
for our posting photographs, which we submitted over the weekend, and then we were unable to pull
the tax clearance certificate because the OPA is still showing, even though my client purchased
the property in 23, they're still showing the prior owner as the owner of the property. So we
weren't able to provide tax clearance, but today we uploaded the screenshot showing that there are
no taxes due on the property. Okay. And do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and
stipulate to its accuracy i waived the reading but i don't stipulate to its accuracy not that i
think it really matters in this case because we have non-opposition from the community and from
the uh council member mr squilla hey thank you you can proceed show your screen sure thank you
everybody see my screen yes okay great yeah my name is david orphanetes um i'm here representing
jim paulo lucci who's the owner again of 910 to 14 water street uh property that's the subject of
this uh this application this appeal uh photograph of which is up on your screen right now i also
have with me Christopher Stromberg, who is the architect on the project. As you can see,
there's an existing structure on the property. It's a triple-wide, 910 to the 914 wide lot,
so three times wider than the properties that extend to the east of it, and you'll see in a
couple of minutes what else is surrounding it. The application is to put two stories on top of
this existing structure that obviously has an existing curb cut, an existing garage door,
and subdivided the lot. Well, subdivided the lot in half and on top of the existing structure to
put two additional stories for two single-family dwellings, accessing the existing curb cut,
which will be made a little bit wider for two off-street parking spaces, one for each unit.
um there's going to be a roof deck above the third floor there'll be a deck off the rear of
the second floor um the we are dimensionally compliant in all respects uh except for the
third floor and i'll get into that in a minute you'll see in the photographs you can see in this
photograph that we have the two-story to the one side we actually have a one-story structure to the
other side um although that's that lock goes all the way through to dickinson street and there is
a two-story portion fronting on Dickinson Street, and due to the technical language of the zoning code,
um fronting on dickinson street and due to the technical language of the zoning code i don't
believe we should have been issued this refusal but in any event we are here today um the this
is a rendering which you'll see in a couple minutes uh of what we're proposing um i have
revised drawings the original application just had three stories going straight up and you'll see
that in our in the drawings that i'll provide to you and show you in a couple minutes and what we
did is we changed the front of the third floor into a mansard with dormers to kind of soften
the height there. We are dimensionally compliant in terms of height. We're reusing the ground floor,
which is not dimensionally compliant, but the second and third floor, which extend above the
existing one-story structure, is dimensionally compliant, as is the roof deck. Here are some
aerials. You can see the property here, and I'll get a little closer. There you go, 910 to 914,
not far off of Passyunk over here. If you go back, you have the Acme up here in the upper
left-hand corner. You have the CVS, the 24-hour CVS, basically across the street. And then next
to us, what you have is you have the Southwark Post Office. And again, that extends from Dickinson
in the Wilder Street. The portion that's next to us is one story, but the older portion that's
again on Dickinson Street is more is two stories. And when we go to the refusal, again, you'll see
why we don't think that the refusal should have been issued, but we'll go through this pretty
quickly. Here's a close-up. You'll see in a couple minutes, 904 Wilder Street went to the zoning
board back in 2018 at calendar number 33906. It was new construction. They had three variances
that they needed, one of which was also not having the front setback above the third floor
because they are between two two-story structures. That third floor went straight up, and you'll see
in photographs, and all three of those variances were granted by that zoning board that was in
place at that time in 2018. We only have the one variance in this case. Here's a close-up.
The property since 1954, you can see right here, there's a zoning permit. And why it looks like a
garage is because dating back to the 50s, it was a garage, auto repair with body and fender work.
So it was a garage dating all the way back to the 50s. Again, that's why we have a building that
has this use has this appearance of an industrial commercial building that as you can see with the
permit this property used to be zoned commercial acom which was prior to the prior zoning code
the property has since been remapped as rsa5 and you can see here the whole block is rsa5
you have ca1 across the street for the cvs and then ca1 across uh pass young where the acme is
here you've seen this picture already here's the subject premises
the existing curb cut that we're going to be widening a little bit for the two
to put in the two garage doors and as you head east you can see here here is the one story
portion of the post office facility here's a view a little bit from the east
dumpsters then you have a three stories property with a three story structure at the end of the
block on our same side and then swinging around again cvs with the parking lot here you have
south percy street and then heading eastward uh on wilder street this is on the north side
opposite you see there's a three-story structure at the end of the block and then swinging back
around you can see here where the arrow is that's 904 wilder again they have a similar man so i
I think before I said that it went straight up,
but they have a similar mansard to what we have.
And they had other variances as well
that they were granted relief by the zoning board for.
And then we have the two-story that's next to us.
Existing interior photos, you can see it's all open.
The existing garage door is to the right here.
And the existing garage door is here, it's to the left,
looking west or looking east as the case may be.
the application again is to subdivide the lot into two lots again it's a three to triple wide
lot the other lots extending the residential lots extending to the east of us are generally all 16
feet I think the one next to us since 902 is 16 one and a half inches they extend to a and include
a three-foot alley our property extends to the middle the half of or the middle of a two-foot
wide alley, essentially the same size, just about the same size lots. But our lots will be bigger.
essentially the same size, just about the same size lots. But our lots will be bigger
than the existing lots to the east. And consequently, you know, we're going to have
nice size units. We're not looking to, we weren't looking to whack this up into three units.
The client's not looking to be greedy about it. One's two nice size, single family homes with,
again, the off-street parking. Those lots are dimensionally compliant because they are so large.
And then here are the original zoning drawings.
As I mentioned, you can see up here, the third floor was just done straight up.
You can see here in the section down here at detail 3C.1.
Again, the third floor going straight up and then showing the pilot house and the roof decks above the deck at the back of the second floor here down in the bottom corner at 1C.1.
The revised drawings you can see here.
And again, we've changed.
We've shown the mansard.
You can see here in the section that I referenced earlier, 3Z.1, where it angles backwards, softening the third floor like 904 did.
And then it's shown again in the site plan view and then in the roof view of just the top of the building.
Here's an elevation drawing showing the existing front and then what we're building above it and then what we're proposing to the left.
the section that's shown in part on the zoning drawings again showing the mansard
that we've set back on the third floor um there's a single family residence behind us which at one
point uh the prop both properties might have been owned by i think were owned by the same person
and the garage might have been utilized by the owner of 915 you can see that in the zoning
archives here are our floor plans so what we're proposing for for the uh for each of the units is
They're a three-bedroom, two-and-a-half bath, and you can see that the main common living area is on the second floor with the walkout deck out the back, which is a nice feature.
And then what you have on the third floor is all the bedrooms.
You have a larger primary bedroom and then two smaller bedrooms, two baths.
There's a powder room on the main living floor.
The ground floor is really nice, has a garage, has a mudroom, nice wide open staircase.
You don't get that real narrow hallway that you often get when you have garages at the front of a property and then a real big home office or storage area at the rear.
And then again, the color elevation that I showed before with the lighter brick, the standing seam metal roof mansard, and then the deck above with the pilot house and the materials that are shown right there.
So the notice of refusal, as I mentioned, is only for the setback of the third floor.
The thing that I highlight, and actually it's interesting because when I contacted the coordinating RCO,
Past Young Square Civic Association, the head of the group said, well, why do you have a refusal?
There aren't only two stories on the next door property.
It's one and two stories.
It does say only two stories, which is not what this has.
as one and two stories, but, you know, to argue with L&I versus and pretty much get nowhere as
opposed to filing the appeal and going forward with this matter, we elected to just go forward,
particularly again with the 904 Wilder Street having been granted a similar variance among
their other variances. At tab six, I've included the deed. Again, as I mentioned, my client took
ownership by this deed of May 24th, 2023. You can see here the OPA still shows the prior owner
who actually, you can see my client purchased it from the estate of that individual who had passed
away. But we did run the tax, show that there are no taxes that were due on the property.
And I did present that to Hillary for today's hearing.
Here's a notice for today's hearing.
It was posted at the property by my client.
You can see here.
And then we had a meeting with, again, the Coordinating RCO is the Pasadena Square Civic Association.
And we met with them on January 14th of this year.
And we did send out with the here's the email from the from Planning Commission showing designating them as a coordinating RCO, a list of addresses to which we sent the 14303 notice, the copy of our 14303 notice.
We hadn't yet made the change to the man start at the front of the third.
We did go in to the meeting with Pastor Young Square already making that change.
It wasn't made at the request of the community.
We went ahead and did that and presented that to the community group.
And then the mailing of 98 items.
Those are the number of addresses that were on the list of that we produced with the Planning Commission's link.
Those are the number of addresses that were on the list of that we produced.
So in this case, we feel that there is a hardship in this case, given not only the variances that was previously granted for 904,
but also when you take into account that you have a large commercial property located directly across the street,
you have the post office located right next to us, you have the history of commercial use here,
But the remapping to RSA 5, the fact that my client is not looking to subdivide into three lots of a similar size as the residential properties extending to the east of us on the same side and even extending northward on the east side of South Percy Street, but being very conservative, only going for two units.
So we feel it's a de minimis variance, even to the extent that there is this minor variance that L&I decided to issue, despite the language, technical language of that zoning code provision.
Because the structure is located on the south side of the street, the fact that the third floor is not set back the required or the eight feet that that provision of the zoning code requires in circumstances where there are two stories, only two stories to either side, won't have any impact.
It definitely won't have any impact on the residential structures to the west of us, given how the sun travels.
If there is any shadowing, there could be a little shadowing in the early summer hours on the roof of the post office,
which I think we would imagine isn't going anywhere anytime soon, given that it's even though it's owned RSA 5.
So we don't believe that there'll be any impact, negative impact on traffic, creating any congestion in the streets.
We're making an existing curb cut a little bit wider, and we're getting two cars for
the units off the street with the proposed off-street parking, reuse of the existing
off-street parking, previously permit parking at the site.
So for those reasons, we would request that the zoning board grant the one variance in
this case.
And with that, I would like to have both my client, Jim Paolo, as well as Christopher
stouffer or christopher christopher stromberg um adopt my uh my statements that i've made to
the board this evening i would have them promoted to panelists so they can be sworn in
they'll be coming back in as a panel shortly
should be coming back in as a panel shortly thank you
good evening please state your name and spell it for the course now
john paulo lucci g-i-a-n-p-a-o-l-o last name l-d-u-c-c-i do you swear to tell the truth
the whole truth and nothing but the truth i do please proceed counsel thank you sir um jim paulo
you're the owner of 910 to 14 wilder street correct yes okay and uh did you hear the statements
that i made to the board yeah and are they true and correct to the best of your knowledge
yes and would you adopt them as your own yes i would thank you that's all the questions i have
the property owner thank you mr stromberg could be sworn in
they've also been allowed to speak
good evening state your name and spell it for the court sonographer
my name is christopher stromberg c-h-r-s-t-o-p-h-e-r last name s-t-r-o-m-b-e-r-g
you swear to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth
i do please proceed councilman just stromberg uh you prepared the drawings that we presented
and the other materials that we presented to the zoning board this evening
yes and uh did you hear the statements that i made to the board today
i did and are they true and correct to the best of your knowledge yes and would you adopt them as
your own i would thank you i have no further questions and with that i would submit our
exhibits into the record and and we rest thank you council questions from the board
it was i corrected hearing that they had support or just non-opposition it's non-opposition i have
them up on the screen right now so i didn't i did not flash them to you before but here you can see
letter from passing square civic association voted seven to one pretty pretty convincing uh vote but
it was still one of non-opposition i'm not sure what their policy is whether i can't remember if
they're one of the groups that never supports anything the best you'll get is non-opposition
but uh and then we have that council member mark spola's letter of non-opposition as well
anything else board member johns no that's it uh questions from our attorney hillary emerson
anything else board member johns nope
uh two very quick things first i think there's a refusal missing for having front-loaded parking
in an rsa 5 zoning district so just wanted to note that for the record there's not because
hillary because it's because it's existing parking it's previously permitted parking
under that fact sheet pz 006 um you're allowed to reuse it as long as it hasn't been discontinued
for more than three years got you okay and that makes sense um and then for um there were two
pages not two pages but uh two iterations of revised plans that were sent in this afternoon
um i think the second one in addition to the man side group had a couple of other minor changes but
we didn't have a proviso form for that one so if you could send in a proviso form for the second
which i believe is the one that you want that's the one that i just showed you yes yeah okay thank
you yeah and had things like the ac condenser was taken off because that's not something related
things of that nature questions from the virtual audience i see no further hands mr chair by any
commission this is uh ron bednar city planning
you spell your name ron that's your first one first name ron r-o-n last name bednar b-e-d-n-a-r
spell the whole troop the whole troop and nothing but the truth i do thank you comprehensive plan
recommends no change to the residential single family attached zoning at this location
there's no unique physical circumstances of the property that was prevented from being used
informing with the zoning code therefore the city planning commission recommends that the board
deny the proposed variance for third floor and roof set uh roof deck setback one thing i could
i would like to add there is that the lot is not very deep so if we were to take eight feet off
and set the front of the building back eight feet uh we lose we lose most of most of those front
rooms. You can see here, that's one thing I didn't add before, and I can have Christopher
elaborate on that a little bit. Because the lot is so shallow, and we fall under the exception
for the open area requirement, because that applies to lots that are under 45 feet.
But you can see the front bedrooms are only 10 feet deep. So if we were to set those back,
You'd be talking about a one, maybe a two bedroom house situation here.
And again, the fact that we're located on the south side of the street, as opposed to the north side of the street, we're not going to have any impact in terms of shadowing.
So because a lot is so shallow and because of the location of the property on the south side, we feel that there is a hardship.
And the other criteria set forth in the zoning code for the granting of this dimensional variance are satisfied in this case and warrant the granting of that variance.
Thank you. MI-2024-006914.
910 to 914 Wilder Street. My vote is yes with revised plans and dated one page dated
February 26, 2025. My vote is yes with proviso.
Cheryl Gaston, my vote is yes with proviso. Tanetta Graham, my vote is yes with proviso.
Thank you. Thank you.
There's anyone else out there in the virtual audience
whose case has not been heard for the 2 o'clock call?
Mr. Chair, I do not see any hands raised.
Okay, so we're going to go right on into the...
We'll take a five-minute break, and we'll get right back to the
3.30 list.
Wiggle their legs.
Good evening. My name is Ishmael Shahi, and I will be chairing this meeting of the Philadelphia
Zone and Board of Adjustments. With me is Board Member Cheryl Gaston.
Present, Mr. Chairman.
Board Member Tanetta Graham.
Present, Mr. Chairman.
And Board Member Michael Johns. He is here. He may have stepped away for a moment, but
we're going to continue. Also present is Hillary Emerson, our attorney, and Board
Administrator Leticia Dandy. Please be advised that this meeting
is being recorded and your participation in this meeting indicates your
and your participation in this meeting indicates your consent to be recorded the video will be
consent to be recorded.
posted on the zba website approximately one week following this meeting this meeting is being held
in person with remote with remote capabilities meaning that individuals can participate either
in person at the hearing room and the one parkway building or remotely over zoom when you are
recognized to speak by the board please state and spell your name for the court reporter
and then wait to be sworn in if you are in the hearing room you must speak into the microphone
so that everyone is in attendance including the court reporter can hear you if you are
participating remotely please turn your cameras on and unmute yourself when you are called when you
are recognized to speak. Once you have been sworn in, please state your name each time before
testifying whether you are in person or remote so that the court reporter knows who is speaking.
Please mute yourself or turn off your microphone when you are not being speaking. If you are
participating by phone, press star nine to raise your hand and star six to unmute. If you are
participating by phone, please call 267-270-5548 to register your appearance by the close of
the business day after the hearing. You must provide your email address and the address of
the property if you are interested. All others can enter in their appearance through the Zoom
registration. For individuals participating in person, a QR code is available to register your
appearance. For assistance, please see a staff member at the back of the hearing room. If you
have any questions about how to enter your appearance, please contact RCOZBA at VOLA.gov.
And we'll go ahead and get right into this. Our continuances, MI-2024-006210,
Vanquert Street.
This case is being continued.
First listing
must be heard
on August 20th,
at 3.30pm.
Alright, we have no more
continuances. We're going to go to our No Exhibits
2MI-2024
0-0-6-1-7-9-58-21
Haverford Avenue.
This case is being continued
to March 26, 2025
at 930 a.m.
This is the first
listen as well, so it must be heard on the
next one. Number three, MI-
2024-006-208
6032 Edmond Street.
Mr. Chair, can you speak
a little bit, a little louder?
Sure, sure, sure. Apologize.
MI-2024-006-208-6032 Edmond Street, no exhibits for its listing. This case is going to be
continued as well to August 20th, 2025, at 3.30pm. Excuse me, Mr. Chair, can we just see if anybody
is here for that case? We have New Alton Batista Aracena as the listed owner. We also have a
third-party um expediter i believe is anyone in the audience for 6032 admin the virtual audience
good evening mr chair this is jason hand i will be the co-host for the session
i do not see anyone answering to any of those names in the virtual audience this evening
okay so this is the first listing um with no exhibits we are moving this on to august
We're going to continue it until August 20th, 2025, and it must be heard at 3.30 p.m.
Okay, okay.
Going on to the regular list.
Number one, MI 2024-001-673-920-1⁄2, West Somerset Street.
Devin is the attorney.
They will be coming back in as a panel of strokes out.
Thank you.
Good evening, Council.
Good afternoon, Chair.
Nice to see you again.
As always, please state your name and spell it again for the court synographer.
again for the court stenographer uh devon ukdai last name uqdah you swear to tell the truth the
Devin Okta, last name UQD.
whole truth and nothing but the truth yes can you please identify your client in relationship to him
uh yes um tell him to hop back on sorry
my client is um eric knight he is the owner of the property should be logging back on momentarily
okay our board member um mrs green oh this is a result okay
all right uh so you would like to just add some additional notes and we're going to open this up
for public testimony after you and then we'll go ahead on to the planning commission so mr
please proceed yeah yeah so um pretty much we presented this share my screen second we um
presented this at a prior hearing and um there's a discrepancy because we had to have we had to
an amended refusal letter. The original refusal letter stated that it was for
a single-family home. So this is the amended refusal letter that we received that states
that it's for a three-dwelling unit. So this is the amended refusal that we had to receive.
um additionally um the original um the original notice of the rco said two family um it actually
is for a three family and we presented it to the rco as a three family so we had to go back to the
rco they they all voted in support unanimously um we presented that it would sorry we we presented
that it would be three units um the two units will remain and one unit is going to be one unit
is going to be renovated from commercial to residential.
So we had to get a confirmation from the RCO
that we actually did present on it being three units.
This is the 37th Ward emailing that this email is affirming
that when the property was presented before RCO
that presented the property as having three units, not two,
we voted to support the application
for three units at this site.
If you have any questions, feel free to reach out.
So just adding back, adding to the testimony
that we do have unanimous support from the RCO
for three units.
Thank you.
Anything else you want to add before we move on?
Public testimony.
Do we have anyone out in the virtual audience
that would like to testify
on this case?
Mr. Chair,
I do not see any hands raised for this matter.
Thank you, Mr. Hand
Planning Commission.
Did you want to add anything,
counsel?
Is your client here to adopt it?
Mr. Ohtow?
It should be in the audience.
Let me also just call him.
What's the name?
Eric Knight.
Eric is not there, but I guess we can accept you as an officer of the court.
Accept your testimony as an officer of the court.
Planning commission?
Ron Bednar, City Planning.
comprehensive plan recommends a change to the zoning at this location from commercial mixed
use cmx2 to residential single-family rsa5 historically the property was used as a two
family with a commercial unit at the bottom the proposal to change the commercial use
into residential is more consistent with the proposed uh residential zoning the city planning
commission therefore recommends that the board grant the requested variance for three unit
household living thank you uh mi-2024-001673 920 and a half west somerset street my vote is yes
with proviso per amended refusal
dated September 10,
My vote is
yes with proviso.
Charles Gaston, my vote is yes
with proviso.
My vote is yes with proviso.
Have a good evening.
Number five, MI-2024-006213.
3135 South
Jupiter Street.
Vincent
the female attorney for applicant
they'll be coming back in as the panelists
We'll be coming back in as the panelists shortly, sir.
shortly sir thank you so much
Thank you so much, Mr. Haynes.
Good evening, Counselor.
Hello.
How are you?
All right, and yourself?
I'm wonderful.
Can't complain.
Beautiful.
I'm not wonderful.
Just watching all these great zoning hearings.
My name is Vincent DeFino, so it's V-I-N-C-E-N-T-D-E-F, as in Frank, capital F-I-N-O.
Do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Thank you.
Can you please identify your client and your relationship to him?
My clients are Philip and Roma Crenitti.
They reside at 3135 Juniper Street in Philadelphia, PA.
And this is an application for the erection of an open accessory rear deck with steers leading from the ground floor.
Thank you.
And basically, Phillip is here with me.
He'll adopt my testimony at the end, I gather.
Um, but, uh, this was refused because of a setback, uh, required three feet, proposed one, and the stairs leading from the ground floor to the deck is prohibited.
Yes. So we did receive a letter of support from Veteran Stadium's Neighborhood Civic Association, and our board member, Ms. Grant, has a few additional questions.
Good evening. Have you emailed all the required documents and exhibits needed to proceed with this case five days prior to the hearing?
Okay. And do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and do you stipulate to its accuracy?
Yes, I do.
Okay. Thank you. You may proceed.
Okay. I'm sharing my screen now. Do you guys see it?
okay here's the refusal as i stated before this is the front of the house this is 31 35 juniper
street uh there you see the uh posted zoning that was required 20 days in advance and it's stamped
2-1-2025 you can see that in the corner there this this is the rear where the deck is going to go
and as you see there's a deck next to it that's white to the right i'll show you here um there's
a deck next to it to the right which is white and there's a brown deck to the left the house in the
middle is where the deck's going to go and the proposed size of the deck is a 16 by 18.75 it's a
300 square foot deck and I do have a plan that is blown up a little bigger I
can get you that right here and here's the site plan and you can see the stairs
going from the bottom up to the deck and the dimensions of the deck the deck is
16 wide it's the length of the house i mean the width of the house and it's 18.75
out to the back and it has a one foot setback rather than a three foot setback
so he met with the uh neighbors next door they're fine with it because they have decks of their own
and uh we met with the neighbors a couple called and said they had no issues with it
um and um the neighbors aren't are okay with everything so uh
they gave us a letter and i think you have that letter there
yes and i have it here and and uh here's the letter from veteran stadium neighbors association
and that's rich demarco's group and they're they're right below uh they're just north of
veteran state well we're the old veteran stadiums at the stadium district there
and we had a virtual meeting he was good with it uh this is the tax clearance request um
this was the notice we sent to the neighbors and there's the bulk mailing and um we just asked that
We were just asked that. Here's the deed to my client, April 26, 2024.
Here's the deed to my client, April 26.
And if you have any questions, we'll be glad to entertain them.
My client's here. Phil Crenetti, you can step up to the camera, Phil.
And I you heard my testimony today.
Can you please state your name for the court sonographer?
Sure. My name is Philip Crenity. It's spelled P-H-I-L-L-I-P. Last name Crenity, C-R-I-N-I-T-I.
And you heard. Yes, I do. Please proceed, Counselor.
OK, so you heard my. Yes, you heard my testimony. I did. And it's true and accurate.
Yes. To the best of your knowledge. Yes, it is.
and you adopt it as your own?
Okay, thank you.
We'll move all of this into evidence.
All right, so
I'd like to just submit this package
and the evidence and rest with that.
Thank you, counsel.
Questions from the board?
Yes, so the other decks
that are adjacent to the property,
do they have the stairwells
to the ground level as well?
No, I don't. They do not.
Any other questions?
Not a question, but a comment. One of the
things that decks are not supposed to have
are permanently affixed to roof or stairs.
Comment.
questions i'm sorry what was it excuse me
hi i'm just just saying that you know decks are not supposed to have the stairs
none of them okay so i mean i know what you're asking for i'm just saying
questions from our
the neighbors everybody was okay with it
i can understand that too okay i don't have any questions mr chair thank you questions from the
virtual audience i do not see any hands mr chair planning commission sir ron bednar city planning
the property is indicated for a single family residential use on the adopted district plan
no change has been recommended to the existing zoning dislocation the applicant's hardship is
not supported with evidence of unique physical circumstances or the condition of the property
that would prevent it from being used in conformance with the code requirements
we therefore recommend that the request of variance not be granted
MI-2024-006-213-3135
South Jupiter Street. My vote is no.
My vote is Michael Johnson. My vote is yes.
Cheryl Gaston. My vote is no.
Tanata Graham. My vote is no.
Oh, my God.
Number 7, MI-2024-006-217, 1907 East Seltzer Street.
Christopher Dean.
I'll be coming back in as a panel.
Thank you.
good evening good evening council how are you i'm good like you know i got a lot of work done
in the last five hours so that's that was good that's always good got a lot of work done also
today uh um are we the last name you will you're you're the only one that's holding us between now
I will be as efficient as possible.
State your name and spell it.
Christopher Dean, C-H-R-I-S-T-O-P-H-E-R
D-E-A-N.
Do you swear to tell the truth and hold the truth and nothing but the truth?
I do. And I agree to waive the reading of the refusal.
All right. And please identify your client.
My client is Edward Nelling.
He's a property owner, and Ben Estefani, the architect, also may be in attendance.
Counselor, Mrs. Grant.
thank you um have you emailed all the required documents and exhibits needed to proceed with
Thank you.
this case five days prior to this hearing yes okay and you already agreed to waive uh the
refusal but do you stipulate to its accuracy though yes you i forgot something all right
you can proceed okay share my screen
uh we have unanimous support from some somerset neighbors for a better living
all right i will um i'm just going to move through the exhibits and then i'll get to the
the nuts and bolts um we're here for 1907 east seltzer street my client owns both 1907 and 1909
Both very narrow, low-density lots.
This is my client's deed.
Here is a refusal.
We're here for three reasons.
Two of them are on density.
Both the density arguments are going to be because these lots are so extremely small.
In fact, this area is surrounded by an industrial mixed use, and historically, these houses, this area is called the village, and these properties were used just to house some of the factory workers going back into the 50s and 60s, which makes these streets pretty particularly narrow compared to most single-family residences in Philadelphia.
And the last one would be my client built this small garage on his lot, and we have
a proposed parking proposal, which is expressly prohibited in the RSA 5 district.
This is the PIF.
This was our application for appeal filed.
These are a copy of the plans.
I will have Ben just go over them very briefly.
and I will scroll back up to them.
On the plans, though, there is a highlighted parking hardship.
You have no, we're at Seltzer, you have no parking everywhere on all of the sides,
on all these small, uniquely small, I should say, lots and properties.
You do have one side of the street parking on Jasper Street,
and you have to go to Somerset to actually get parking on both sides of the street.
this is a picture of the of the building um this is it looking out of the garage
and again this might this is my client's property and this is the appellate the appellant property
as you can see they're both very narrow sized lots um one thing to point out my client does
plan on subdividing these lots if the zoning variance is granted which will
positively impact and lessen the impact of the dimension percentage that this structure has on
his lot. My client, these are pictures of the orange posters. My client is a, you know, at the,
when we met with the Somerset neighbors for better living, you know, he was kind of considered a
pillar um it was one of the more pleasant rco meetings i've ever been a part of um in fact
it was brenda mosley who's on the board and also a member of the new kensington development
corporation um she couldn't she praised my client for the what he's done to that community
um as you see we did have 19 to zero uh full support of the project and they did point out
that he has uplifted and um inspired others to take care of his house of their property on that
block uh some of the board members actually lived on that block or live on that block the the
background of why why why this garage was built um during covid my client um he had it was a big
it was a small vacant lot he had his uh he had generators and bite he had a generator and multiple
bikes stolen um bolts cut from the lock they were attacked they were just sitting on the lock attached
to his property um that's what precipitated the need to to build um to build a garage unbeknownst
to him he needed uh he did you know one big mistake made along the way he needed permits
and it was flagged by l and i we worked at all the issues with l and i um in working with the
community they you know they supported his filing of the variance appeal my client actually started
the kensington community bike shop in 2023 it's a repair shop that also provides free education
a bike education with a focus on the youth the education portion is free
he actually stores some of the overflow bikes in his garage
He actually stores some of the overflow bikes in his garage during this busy season, which is typically in the – we're entering it soon, the spring and the summer.
To go into the hardship of the lots, as you can see, this is 1909, where he lives, and the lot size is only 444 square feet, very atypical – I'm sorry, not typical of a city single-family property, and the lot in question is only 486 square feet.
So we do plan, if we do get the zoning, we will subdivide this.
We'll have nearly a thousand square foot lot.
And these are the notices, our hearing to the RCO, our hearing to the ZBA, and I won't bore you with the rest of the, these are the proof of mailing for both hearings.
With that, if Ben Estepani is in the audience, I would ask that he be brought on.
he'll be coming back in as a
panelist
hi Bruce
hey Ben
Ben you designed
the plans for this project is that right
can he state his name and spell it for the
court sonographer please
sure it's Ben
B-E-N last name
Estepani
E-S-T-E-P-A-N-I
you swear to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth yes please receive counsel
ben if you could just briefly um touch on the touch on the plans um in particular this and
in any pre-approvals you have for the um the parking with the streets approved the streets
department sure um yeah i was brought on um to document the existing garage um we documented
of the setbacks um but the way that it's situated um you know with a by right curb cut approved by
the streets department you meet all attorney radiuses to get in and out um from seltzer
street um we have zoning approval for that um so um yeah kind of reiterate what chris said you know
some setbacks in the back that and setbacks at the rear and that's non-conforming setbacks in
side yard that are non-conforming but um again the the actual turning of the vehicles in and
out of the garage um has been approved um by zoning by sorry by um by streets department
for their zoning review thank you
and if edward nelling is in the um audience if he can be brought on as a panelist
They're coming back in presently.
Hello?
Yes, good evening, sir.
Can you please state your name and spell it for the court sonographer?
first edward nelling e-d-w-a-r-d last name n as in nancy e-l-l-i-n-g swear to tell the truth
the whole truth and nothing but the truth i do please proceed council good evening ed um
did you hear my uh the testimony and review the presentation yes great do you adopt the
presentation and testimony as if it were your own yes i do and i just want to ask you one follow-up
question as you know one of our variances is um regarding the proposed rear yard depth
where you have an alley do you if you could explain to the board how the alleys what
any concerns about the alleys and if they're actually utilized
yeah so um behind my house there is an alley in case need be um if anybody needs to get back there
but all the alleys on our block um there's seven lots on my street and there's five houses standing
um all the houses have taken up their whole lot with either a fence or a cinder block wall
um i have my alleys back open to um there's a backyard on jasper street that they open to
but um yeah the alleys are are not utilized here for trash or anything but um if need be
in case of egress you know there is room behind my house um but the alley does not
room behind my house um but the alley does not travel the whole way the whole length of seltzer
street um on my side or really anywhere in the neighborhood going down helen or any of the side
streets seltzer sterner or silver is it your testimony that the side streets of highlighted
seltzer silver and sterner are they significantly um narrower and less dense than somerset and
Jasper. Yes, they are. Okay. And you, did you, and did you build the garage?
I strike that. Why did you build the garage?
To have more, you know, storage for stuff. And like I said, you know, in the beginning of all
this, I, I had some tools, stolen generator bikes, and it wasn't just someone coming into the lot
and taking it they were you know going in there and cutting locks and um i needed more security
and you are aware that if the board grants the variance you still have to go through all the
building permit requirements and to subdivide um and you and you plan on subdividing both lots
is that correct yeah yes and i'm prepared to do all that with the permits and the subdivision
Okay. I have nothing further.
Thank you, Counsel. Questions from the board?
Yeah, a question. First, I guess, just presentation-wide, it's very difficult to read to see the drawings with this grid.
Oh, you know, I thought that was only on my screen. That just started happening yesterday, and I did not know that translated. I apologize.
guys this makes it difficult to read so i'm kind of looking at these pictures and if i look at this
one two third it's the third picture down is this the front side of that street it is the one i'm
highlighting right here that's the street that this the drop that the uh that this garage uh
fronts on yes yeah so i mean the street is narrow and i'm concerned that you know you really don't
have room to get people are already parking on the pavement across the street you can see all the way
down the street, they're parking on the pavement. So I don't know how you're going to get in and
out of that garage if people are parked on the street. Well, they do. And Ben can jump back on
if necessary, but they do. I mean, the streets department did pre-approve it. I understand that
the streets department pre-approved it. But when I look at the pictures of the block, the people
are parking on top of the pavement, right? Which means that it's a very narrow street. So people
are parked if they even tried to park on the street you'd never be able to get into your um
your um your driveway well and that is i mean here's so here's actually what is up directly
across the street um so uh you know understandably it is going to be a tight uh the turning rate it
will be tight um you're not going to be parking um you know an escalate an escalate in there but
um there is there is a severe parking parking hardship um in that surrounding block on coupled
with the fact that there are um i don't see where there's a parking hardship there's like nothing
near there's nothing near you got parking everywhere i don't know i mean all the side
there's no parking on all the sides and it is a one-way street i don't agree i don't agree and i
see that everybody is parking on the pavement every picture you have people on the pavement
There's not one person that's parked in a parking spot on the street.
Well, we're trying to do it legally.
But you won't be able to get in.
You know, people, you can't get in the parking space.
Well, and the garage does serve a safety purpose and it has revitalized, you know, the neighborhood really.
And when we did get, you know, 19 and 0, they support, you know.
I understand. I'm just, I'm looking at the reality of what you're saying.
No, functionally, I do recognize that some, you know, some days it might be harder than others.
All right. I have no other question.
Anyone else? Any other board members have any questions?
Questions from our attorney, Hillary Emerson?
Not at this time, Mr. Chair.
Anybody on the virtual audience have any questions?
No further answer, Mr. Chair.
Planning Commission?
This is Ron Bednar.
City planning.
the property is indicated for residential use on the city plan or adopted district plan recommends
no change to existing zoning at this location the applicant's hardship is not supported with
evidence of unique physical circumstances of the property therefore we recommend request
variance not be granted we're going to hold this and take this to executive session
for more conversation.
Council
Council, we'll vote on this next week at 3.30 list.
will vote on this
next week at 3.33.
The 2 o'clock list.
2 o'clock list.
Thank you.
All right.
You have a good one.
Is there anyone else out there in the virtual audience who case has not been heard for the
3.30 list?
You're not too many further hands, Mr. Chair.
All right.
I just want to thank all of the staff for today and your patience.
It's a long day, but hopefully you all enjoy your nights and your evenings and get home safely.
Have a good night.
Thank you.
Have a good night.
All right.
Thank you.
Thanks.