Thank you.
CHAIR, WE HAVE 34 ATTENDEES AND WE CAN START AS YOU WISH.
THANK YOU.
GOOD MORNING.
MY NAME IS BILL BERGMAN AND I WILL BE CHAIRING THIS MORNING ZBA HEARING.
WITH ME IS OUR VICE CHAIR, IJMAEL SHAHEED.
PRESENT, MR.
Our board member, Thomas Holliman.
Present, Mr. Chairman.
And we also have an alternate board member today from Development Services, Emily Persico.
Present, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you.
Also present is Hillary Emerson, our attorney, and our executive director, Tanya Sunkett.
Here's our virtual format.
Be advised the proceedings are being recorded.
A video will be available by contacting TanyaSunkett at philip .gov.
For the benefit of our court sonographer, we ask attorneys and witnesses to identify themselves before testifying.
If you're participating by phone and you wish to testify, press star 9 to raise your hand and star 6 to unmute.
So on an appearance statement, call 267 -270 -5548.
Leave your email and the address of the property in question.
And finally, the question -answer box on the screen is not for comments or testimony.
All comments should be directed to our Executive Director, Tanya Sunke.
Let's look at the continuities we have this morning.
Number six, MI 2022 -003 -671, 1825 South 22nd Street.
This case is continued to August 30th, 2023.
And number 11, MI -2022 -003 -437 -6900 Chester Avenue, Parcel B.
This case has been requested, continues from Councilman Johnson and the 40th Ward Republicans.
Is Hal Shermer present?
Mr. Chair, this is Hillary.
I actually just got an email from Mr. Shermer that his clients are in agreement with the
continuous request. Thank you. So MI 2022 -003 -437 -6900 Chester Avenue, Parcel B. That case
is continued. Is there anyone in the audience who has comments relative to two cases I just
continued good morning mr chair this is jason hand i will be co -hosting this morning i do not
see any further hand at this time thank you very much jason are there any other requests for
continuance we have a hand up from mr joe joseph council i have allowed him to speak
Good morning, board, Joe Consul.
I got brought in yesterday for 825.
Mr. Consul, hold on one minute, just for the record, spell your name.
Sorry.
It's Joseph J -O -S -E -P -H, last name Consul, C -O -N -S -O -L -E.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
I do, Chair.
Which case?
It is 825 South 13th Street.
Hold on a minute here.
That's case number eight.
I was brought in yesterday very late as counsel here.
I don't believe a packet was sent.
Perhaps Hillary could confirm that for me.
There were no exhibits submitted, Mr. Consul.
Thank you, Hillary.
So in that case, I believe this would be the final continuance.
I think that happened once before, but I'll have a word.
So, MI 2022 -003 -753 -825 South 13th Street, that case is continued, must be heard.
Thank you.
I thank you, Mr. Consul.
Are there any other requests for continuances?
Mr. Chair, I do not see any further hand.
Okay, thank you.
I have several cases that we do not have exhibits. Hold on a moment.
Exhibits, number one, MI 2022, 003 -512 -941 -Dorset Street.
We have no exhibits.
This is the second listing.
Mr. Chair, I have Mr.
His hand was raised.
Now I put it down.
So I do not see any hands for that case, Mr. Chair.
So MI 2022, 003 -512 -941 -Dorset Street.
This is the second listing.
No one appeared the last time.
I vote to dismiss.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is to dismiss.
it's no shaheed my vote is to dismiss
number three mi 2022 003 655 1021 dickison street no exhibits second listing frank martirano is the
honor applicant. I see no hands raised, Mr. Chair. So MI -2022 -003 -655 -1021 Dickinson Street,
second listing. No one appeared the last time. I vote to dismiss.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is to dismiss.
ishmael shaheed ishmael shaheed my vote is to dismiss
thank you um number eight we already have done number nine mi 2021 000 981 54 15 cedar avenue
no exhibits third listing lisa bethea is the listed owner
no hands mr chair so so mi 2021 000 981 5415 cedar avenue no exhibits third listing no one
appeared the last listing, I vote to dismiss. Thomas Holloman, my vote is to dismiss.
Ishmael Shahid, my vote is to dismiss.
Thank you. Number 13, MI 2022 003 -648 -513 North Holly Street.
Matthew Ragano is the listed applicant. No exhibits, second listing, no record of an RCAO meeting. No one appeared last time.
no hands mr chair thank you so number 13 mi 2022 003 648 513 north holly street
second listing no one appeared the last time i vote to dismiss
Thomas Holloman
Ishmael Shahid
My vote is to dismiss
Thank you
Number 14
MI2022
003652
Judson Street
Paula Carter is the owner
No Exhibits second listing
Again, no hands, Mr. Chair.
Thank you. So MI 2022 -003 -652 -8886, Judson Street, second listing, no exhibits.
Ms. Carter was here the last time. I vote to dismiss.
Thomas Hollowan, my vote is to dismiss.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is to dismiss.
Thank you.
And number 16, MI 2022 -004 -490 -218 West Tabor Road. Franklin Daniel is the owner -applicant. No exhibits, second listing.
No hands, Mr. Chair.
Thank you. So MI -2022 -004 -490, 218 West Tabor Road. No exhibits. Second listing. No one appeared last time. I vote to dismiss.
Thomas Solomon, my vote is to dismiss.
Ishmael Shahid, my vote is to dismiss.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is to dismiss.
Thank you.
Thank you. We're going to go to our...
We're going to go to our add -on list.
MI 2022 -007 -137 -454 Delmar Street.
The vote in this matter is being rescheduled to Wednesday, June 7th, 2023 at 9 .30 a .m.
Number two, MI 2022 -007 -127 -606 Pine Street, I vote no.
Thomas Pollard, my vote is no.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is no.
Thank you.
We're going to go to our regular list.
Number two, MI 2022 -001 -991 -1239 North Allison Street. Amari Jax is the owner applicant. It's pro se.
Mr. Jax, we'll be rejoining as panelist, sir.
Thank you.
Good morning, Mr. Jax.
Hi, it's Ms. Jax, actually.
Okay, thank you. Could you state your name, please, as a spell for the court reporter?
Yes, first name is Amari, A -M as in mom, A -R -I, last name Jax, J -A -C -K -S.
You swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
Could you turn your video on, please?
The lighting is bad.
You guys see?
We see you.
Light's bad, but we do see you.
So, do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
All right.
Thank you.
This application is for two -family household living in an existing structure.
The proposed two -family household living is prohibited in the RSA 5 zoning district.
Our vice chair just has a few questions for you, okay?
Good morning, ma 'am.
Have you emailed all the required documents that are needed to proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing?
I have, yes.
Thank you.
you can proceed please share your screen. And I will note you do have a letter of
support from HMC Square Community Association. Okay thank you.
The green button at the bottom. Yep got it.
So this is how it looks now. Can you guys see? We see a picture of a chair with a little table.
So this is just one of the rooms. It was a carpet. I changed the flooring to laminated flooring.
Let's go to the next one. Just a moment.
Why don't you show a picture of the outside of the building first?
I can do that. One second.
This is the exterior here. The wooden fence.
Okay. Yep.
Front door. So back up.
This is entering the second floor unit. There's the stairs.
This is the kitchen.
This is the bedroom.
This is one of the bedrooms here.
and then the initial bedroom floor I removed the tenant. This was her master bedroom.
The bathroom, the hallway that leads down to the steps upon entry and then you see the kitchen
there and the bedroom is behind where this photo was taken. This is in the first floor unit which
is connected to the basement. Shows two separate panels, one for the first floor, one for the second
floor to utilize the electricity obviously. I had the bathroom redone in the first floor unit which
I'm currently living now so this was the initial flooring and has changed to laminated flooring as
well. Same here this was the progress in the hallway of the first floor unit leading to the
two bedrooms one ahead and one to the left. This is the main bedroom which you just saw in the
beginning with the desk and the chair.
I threw out the initial oven that was here
throughout the initial oven that was here for the first floor unit. So this is just the flooring
for the first floor unit.
So this is just the flooring that was underneath.
that was underneath or I guess underneath and behind that oven that has been replaced now.
This is the basement which was totally redone. There was some carpeting that was used for
business that should not have been there in the first place. Got rid of that and replaced that
with laminated flooring as well. Another photo of that and then the interior of that middle room that
you saw earlier, and we're back at the beginning. So, Ms. Jax, how long has it been a duplex?
It has been a duplex. I purchased this in 2021. It's been a duplex. I believe the previous owner
had it listed since the early 2000s. I want to say 2005. I might be wrong. Okay, so you bought
it as a duplex. Correct, but it wasn't a zoning issue. And then you rehabbed it. Yeah, I'm still
in the process of rehabbing slowly but surely I'm living in the first floor unit right now
and and one other question are there other duplexes on the block there was one I noticed
further down I'm not sure what number that is but I would say it's 12 30 something I'm not sure
okay all right all right thank you questions from the board
no Mr. Chairman
no chair questions or comments from the virtual audience
i see no hands at this time sir planning commission thank you chair bergman and good
morning david fecteau f -e -c -t -e -a -u with the city planning commission do you swear or affirm to tell
the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth yes sir i do proceed sir thank you sir
uh mr chairman and members of the board in 2021 the zoning map was amended from residential
multi -family to residential single family on this block and many of the surrounding blocks
the zoning map amendment was recommended by the comprehensive plan and passed by city council with
the support of the community the intent of the zoning map amendment was to encourage single
family infill on neighborhood streets. The proposed use conflicts with this zoning goal.
The city planning commission recommends that the board deny the variance.
All right. Thank you. MI 2022 -001 -991 -1239 North Allison Street. I vote yes.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes.
Ms. Jacks, you have your vote.
I vote yes.
No, no, I'm saying you have your votes, okay?
Oh, okay.
I know you vote yes.
Thank you very much.
Thank you.
Thank you.
All right.
Number four.
Mr. Chair, before we jump into number four, Mr. Harry Cook is here to withdraw one of the cases on the list.
What should I call Mr. Cooks?
Yes, please call Mr. Cooks.
Mr. Cooks.
Good morning.
Mr. Cooks, just identify yourself and spell your name for the court reporter.
Harry Cook, H -A -R -R -Y -C -O -O -K, Anastasia Law.
All right. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
I do so, Mr. Chairman.
What case is that, sir?
1529 West Butler.
Okay, here.
Okay. This is with being withdrawn?
Yes, sir.
Okay. So, number 10, MI 2022, 003 -653 -1529 West Butler Street. The case has been withdrawn.
Thank you, Mr. Cooks.
Thank you, sir.
Okay, we're on number four.
MI 2022 -007 -290 -1800 North 22nd Street.
Meredith Ferreger is the attorney.
As of this point, we still do not have an RCO letter.
Okay, Mr. Chairman.
Ms. Ferreger will be rejoining as a panel.
Thank you.
Good morning, counsel. Could you, I state your name, please, and smell for the court reporter?
Certainly. Meredith Ferliger, F -E -R -L -E -G -E -R,
Dillworth Paxson, 1500 Market Street, Suite 3500E.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Could you identify your client in a relationship to the property?
Could you identify your client in a relationship to the property?
I sure can.
I sure can. My client is Chatham Developers, LLC, and that LLC is the owner of the property, represented here today by Mike Lagudakis.
All right. And our vice chair has just a few questions.
Good morning, counsel. Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Have you emailed in all the required documents that are needed to proceed with this case
five days in advance of this hearing? I have. Thank you. I see you shared your screen. Please
proceed. Thank you very much. Counsel, do you have the RCO letter? I do not, Mr. Chairman,
and I do intend to address that. Okay, go ahead. All right, that's fine. Thank you. Thank you.
Again, Meredith Ferliger here today with Chatham Developers, LLC, the owner of the property at 1800 North 22nd Street.
We do also have a representative from the architecture firm Plato Studios, just in case there's any specific questions on the design or layout.
To summarize, the proposal before the board today requests to restore this property to its historical multifamily use through a comprehensive interior and exterior renovations of this 1915 built structure.
before i begin as mentioned a quick note on the status of the rco letter which i believe has not
been sent um an rco meeting was held on april 13th 2023 our notice was sent to over 130 addresses
however only a few people which did include the rco leader miss miss robinson attended the meeting
I did forward those certificates of mailing to board council and administration. No one at the meeting raised any concerns over this proposal, as they recognized, as the board will see, the multifamily history of the property and the predominantly multifamily character of this block.
They were also very pleased by the intent to renovate the structure instead of demolishing it.
The RCO leader requested a couple items of follow -up, such as plans for any street trees, affordability information, and a sanitation plan, which I did provide to her, and I have been trying to follow up with her for several weeks now without success.
I did send a copy of all that correspondence over to board counsel and administration as well, just to document the fact that I have been trying to follow up.
I'm honestly surprised she didn't send a letter, given, you know, how the meeting went.
So I'm not sure if, you know, she got tied up, but board counsel does have a copy of all that correspondence to document that.
So to move on, I'll start first with some neighborhood context.
the board has all my exhibits which contain 14 total exhibits at exhibit seven the board will
note that this property at 1800 north 22nd street sits right at the corner of north 22nd street
and west montgomery avenue in north philadelphia this is just a few blocks north of ridge avenue
to the south the board will note the significant new multifamily development that has occurred in
recent years, which actually includes a conversion of this church structure. The north end of this
property is bordered by other existing structures, although not all of them are in habitable
condition. To the southeast is the substantial Martin Luther King Rec Center and Park,
and then just some existing vacant lots across the street.
At Exhibit 14, you'll see some photos showing the existing condition of this 3600 square foot structure.
As I mentioned earlier, it was built in 1915 and has certainly and will hopefully soon see brighter days.
The first photo here showing the frontage from West Montgomery Avenue.
You'll note the two entrances that exist here on this side, which previously served two commercial spaces many years ago.
The proposal intends to keep these two entry points in the middle, while this entry point in the rear will be relocated to the back of the structure.
And this, if the board just wants to take note, these entry points are actually going to be important to some of the other information I'll present later.
Now, moving through some of the photos again just a different view to show you the back of the structure.
And then again, this shows you the newer multifamily structures that have been built just across West Montgomery Avenue.
Now, looking north, you'll note the uniform facade line that starts with this corner property and extends at least nine homes up on North 22nd Street.
Now looking north, you'll note the uniform facade line that starts
So, let's go.
Now, on the interior, you'll note that this property is in a significantly decrepit state here.
And just a couple of different views of what the interior of this structure currently looks like.
obviously this structure requires a complete gut renovation
the zoning map at exhibit six shows that the property is owned cmx one
and the adjoining block to the north is zoned rsa five to the south the properties are all zoned rm
one the permit history for this property is shown at exhibit eight the property has some mixed
history of commercial and multifamily use. But for most of its history, it contained a total of six
units, which included four dwelling units and two commercial units. As far as L &I's history shows,
the last time it was occupied was sometime probably around the early 2000s. So it's been
pretty run down for quite some time now. My client is proposing a comprehensive renovation
of the property to restore it to its historical use as six separate units. Given the current
character of this area, the six units will be solely residential. No commercial use is proposed,
nor would one be required. The proposed floor plans are shown at exhibit five, and I can zoom
in a little bit on this for you. The structure will have two units per floor, with the units
ranging from 522 square feet to around 620 square feet. And you can see the breakdown
here to the right. Each unit is a one -bedroom, one -bathroom unit. And the one thing we want
the board to note is the efficient design here with the center staircase towards the middle of
the structure. This design with the center staircase accommodates a couple of important
features, which is important for the board to review to understand why six units provides the
most appropriate layout for this structure. On the first floor, you'll note having the center
staircase provides the ability to have four separate points of ingress and egress in the
front, two on the side, one which is a common egress point, and one in the back. This is also
consistent with its historical layout which you can see from the exterior additionally the center
the center staircase ensures that each of these second floor units have the benefit of these
historical bay windows which will be restored the center staircase design also ensures that
the newly renovated structure will comply with modern building code requirements for egress
light and air and fire safety. Designing this structure for anything less than two units per
floor would be quite challenging and inefficient for the space. Renderings of the proposal for
the newly updated structure are also provided. Trash will be secured in a secured area in the
rear yard and will be collected by a commercial hauler several times a week. My client does have
some other properties in the area, so he will be managing this himself. Regarding the refusal,
because the property is zoned CMX1, the code dictates that permissible uses are in accordance
with the surrounding zoning. In this case, the directly adjoining property is zoned RSA5,
which would prohibit the multifamily use of the property. In addition to the strictly mixed
multi -family and commercial history of the property, which I presented earlier, the hardship
further lies in the predominantly multi -family character of this block. Additionally, to restore
a structure that is over 100 years old, the owner is required to make a significant investment given
the size and condition of this structure. Unfortunately, the single -family zoning
classification has prevented any use of the building, given the significant hardship in
restoring this property to a single -family use that has never existed here. At Exhibit 9, I have
included zoning permit history for all of the immediately adjacent structures. I've also
summarized those permits on the exhibit list to make it a little bit easier to read. As the board
can clearly see nearly every single property surrounding this property contains between
two and six units. Directly across West Montgomery, the permit history shows structures that
directly across West Montgomery, the permit history shows structures that contain anywhere
from 8 to 18 units. Of particular interest to the board, you may recall granting a variance in August
of 2021 for a structure just a few doors away at 1836 North 22nd Street for six units. That proposal
seemingly even requested some dimensional variances to accommodate the requested density,
where our request has no associated dimensional refusals. The lack of single -family use for this
property for over 100 years, the predominantly multifamily character of this block, and the
significant investment in restoring this historic building establishes it would be a considerable
hardship to establish a single -family use on the property. We also further submit that the
requested variances are the least minimum. As mentioned, there are no dimensional refusals
associated with this request, nor is the existing structure proposed for any form of expansion.
Historically speaking, this building was separated into six separate units, so this density is
consistent with the historical breakdown. I also provided the board evidence of the structural
characteristics that dictate the six -unit layout, which I'm happy to have the architect expand on
if the board should require any additional information. Finally, the proposed density is
much lower than all the structures just to the south and is comparable to all the structures to
the north. The proposal will not increase congestion, as this block is uniquely situated
to accommodate a multifamily development with limited impact on area congestion due to the
surrounding recreational uses. There's also fortunately a bus stop right at the corner in
front of this property. This proposal will not impair light and air as no exterior expansion
is proposed. Accordingly, we submit that this proposal and the requested variances
comply in full with the requirements code section 3038E .2 and a full analysis is provided in the
memo of law submitted to the board at exhibit 10. if the board has any additional questions about
the rco process i would be happy to expand on that and at this time i would see if mike lagudakis
is in the audience to adopt my testimony
Mr. Chair, I have a hand up from Plato Maranacus.
Yes, he's he's the architect.
He's going to have to speak. Yeah. Hi, how are you?
Is this the owner? No, this is the architect.
Could you state your name, please, and spell for the court reporter?
Yeah, it's Plato A. Maranakis, Jr., Plato Studio. Address is 107 South 2nd Street, 4th floor, Philadelphia, PA, 19106.
Right. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
You see, counsel.
Thank you. I wasn't necessarily looking for you, Plato, but since you're here,
Or do you have anything additional you wanted to add to the six -unit layout of this building?
Well, yeah, you handled it very well.
I think you described the big issue is affordability.
And we wanted to make a unit that could be afforded by the community in the neighborhood.
So and the single stair in the center allowed us to do that, because if you didn't do that, then you would have larger units and then it would be unaffordable for most people in the neighborhood.
Thank you. I'm not sure if my client is in the audience, Mike Lagudakis, to adopt my testimony.
If not, Mr. Chairman, as an officer of the court, I would submit that he had he been here, would have adopted my testimony.
we will we will take your testimony thank you questions from the board no mr chairman
questions or comments from the virtual audience
i do not see any hands mr chair planning commission thank you chair bergman and good
morning david effecto with the city planning commission the comprehensive plan recommends
no change to the commercial mixed use zoning at this location this building has a documented use
as a beauty shop candy store and four dwelling units dating to 1953 the applicant has not shown
that they cannot derive value from the previously permitted four dwelling units the city planning
commission recommends the board grant the proposed use variants with a maximum of four dwelling units
And Mr. Chairman, we would submit that the testimony presented today shows why the six unit layout for this property will respect the historical six unit layout of this building and will really result in the most efficient use of this property.
mr chairman we would submit that the testimony presented today
Okay. I know you've submitted numerous things to Hillary. I'm going to hold the vote on this for two weeks. Take one more shot at getting a hold of the RCO, Ms. Robinson, okay? And we will vote on this. What's the date next? Two weeks from today?
two weeks from today is June 7th. June 7th we will vote at 9 30 a .m. and everything everything's
closed other than the letter from the RCO. I'll do my best. Okay Hillary is that okay?
Yes that is fine Mr. Chair thank you. Thank you. Number five MI 2022 007 135 1128 South 52nd Street
German Toppin is the attorney
we do not have an RCO letter
for this
issue either
Mr. Toppin if you're in the virtual audience
please raise your hand
alright Mr. Toppin
has been voted to panelist
you will be rejoining shortly
Good morning, Mr. Toppin. Could you state your name, please, and spell for the court reporter?
Yes. Good morning, Mr. Chair, members of the board. My name is Sherman Toppin, S -H -E -R -M -A -N,
T -O -P -P -I -N. Right. Do you swear a firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the
truth? I do. Could you identify your client and the relationship to this property? Yes,
my client is Paul Bergman. Mr. Bergman is representing his family. The owners of the
property are the Bergmans, and he should be in the audience. He's been on the hall. Perhaps he
can be identified. All right. Our vice chair has just a few questions for you, sir. Yeah.
Good morning, counsel. Do you agree to weigh the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its
accuracy? I do. Have you emailed in all the required documents and exhibits that are needed
to proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing I have and I've also received yes
and I've also received a letter of support from the RCO it was emailed last night around five
right just about 5 p .m and I'll present that in my presentation as well and make sure Hillary
gets it has a copy of that please sir sir okay yep you proceed to share your screen all right
okay is my my screen should be before you you should be looking at my
okay great well i'm chair members of the board i'm happy to be here representing
the berglans and his wife on the property of 1128 south 52nd street in philadelphia west
philadelphia i'll be going through a number of exhibits to share with you our reason for
our particular zoning request today, and we just have one. Looking at the refusal,
our only refusal is to be multifamily. This is the most minimal request for variance that
we have for this particular property. Right now, we're seeking to use the existing use
from single family to a three -family dwelling. And we'll talk about why that is when we go into
to the neighborhood character.
Our exhibit two is basically the deed to the property.
And you'll see here goes down for several pages
until we get to our exhibit three.
And this is our application for appeal.
So what we'll be talking about in today's presentation
is really why the hardship that is presented
by this property being redeveloped as a single family.
On this particular block in particular,
there are 15 multifamily properties on the very same side of the street.
I'll be showing you on our exhibit map here. There we go.
This, hold on, let me get to it. Let me center this for your viewing.
So the property is located almost in the middle of the block in RSA 5. There's RM1 at the end of
the street, and of these homes here, these homes that go from on the South 52nd Street
over towards Warrington Avenue, towards the west side, of these homes, 12 of them are
multifamily, and we'll see pictures of them there.
So in this particular property, almost all of this, and even on the other side of the
Almost all of this, and even on the other side of the street, more than half of the homes on this side of the street and the 50 % of the homes on the eastern side of the street are multifamily.
street, more than half of the homes.
So the character of this particular block has very definitely changed over time and has created a situation where density is needed and affordability is needed.
And that is why my clients are interested in making sure that this property is redeveloped as a free unit.
Let's look at the property more closely. I'll have some pictures of the property here. So here's our, here's the property close up. Now, what is proposed here is to change nothing about this wonderful character. As you can see the corners here, the design of the windows, none of this will change.
It will simply be refinished and upgraded, new window and door, painting and fixing up
of this porch area, but nothing will change.
The character of the property will look just as it is except upgraded.
So from the outside, you will just see a nicer, cleaner, wonderfully developed property
from what you see there.
Along the side of the property, you see it's just stucco along this entire side.
There's a breezeway here that will be overgrown.
That will be taken care of by the development.
In the rear of the property, as you can see, the property is in need of complete renovation, front and back.
Let's look in the inside.
There's a breezeway here shared between the other, and here is where you'll see trash will be stored on this side.
So it will be out of the view of the street until trash day arrives.
and in the inside of the property when you open the front door you can see that there's already
some it can it can really the character that was originally there that continues from the outside
continues on but as you can see in other pictures here it needs to be completely renovated and
brought up and these are the upstairs pictures of the back this is where the kitchen was it's
all taken out pretty much. As we go upstairs, you'll see, again, much of a very traditional
look, three bedrooms upstairs on this particular floor. As you go further up, again, to the top
floor, three bedrooms there, very traditional, but completely in need of renovation.
And if those pictures continue, these are just additional pictures of the floor of the bedrooms.
This one is on the second floor, and these are second floor pitchers.
All of this appearance will be completely done.
And this is the lower level.
The lower level will have no living here.
It will only continue to have mechanicals for each of the three units.
And this is where those mechanicals will be.
And this is the reverse side of the room on the basement level.
so i mentioned that there were multi -families and there's a lot of them
so here's an example of what you see all up and down that street here's 1138 this is 1140
same side of the street just a couple doors down here is i think this particular property is 1126
three mailboxes all of these are legal two and three unit properties here's 1150
three mailboxes is 1136 two two mailboxes and two front doors on this particular property
and this property here you have again this is 1136 1135 right next to it this is 1137
one two three units right there it's almost near virtually across the street
1151, three mailboxes. And it goes on and on and on. So the neighborhood character has become
one in which the density of multifamily is needed and pretty much used throughout this particular
street. So let's look at what's going to be planned for the property. In our exhibit eight,
nothing different but renovation is planned on the first floor, except there's going to be one
door to get into the the the main door will enter into the first floor unit and a second door will
go into the upstairs units as we go into the layout there's three bedrooms i'll make this a
little larger for your viewing so basement again nothing but mechanicals there first bedroom
the first floor will have you will enter there'll be a living room kitchen and there's two bedrooms
in the back and the stairway that goes into the upper units is on this on the left side and as
you move up the layout of the top two floor two two floors are exactly the same as you enter the
as you enter the unit sort of in the middle there's a living area with a kitchen and bath
bedrooms in the front and the back for units two and three
bedrooms in the front and the back for units two and three so as we present as this is a
continued hearing there was a notice that was provided for this particular hearing that notice
in our exhibit 10 was posted on the property and there's pictures of the posting of the notice
on the property we had an rco meeting in this particular case on march the 31st we sent that
The public meeting was on April the 10th at 6 p .m.
Those notices were sent to the 138 required addresses
near neighbors in the affected area.
These are the addresses
and the certificate of mailing to those individuals.
And we have our tax permits
for the two co -owners of the property,
Mr. Bourbon and his wife.
and as far as the rco letter this is the letter here i'll make this bigger that we received
so in the beneath in the meeting itself it was held by zoom there were 11 persons that
attended in total as you can see here the support of the rco board and committee was
was 100 on our favor the other five members that are that were near neighbors that came to the
property were all in support and our team was there to make the presentation so we have unanimous
support from the RCO, and I'll make sure that this, and I think this was emailed to the board,
but it did not arrive, as Mr. Chairman has mentioned earlier. So I'll make sure this is
obtained. So we believe that this particular property, and because the community is in
agreement, that the density that is needed on this particular block on the street is welcome
in this neighborhood and needed in this neighborhood. So we simply want the opportunity
to allow my client to develop the property as a three -unit building and I'll ask at this time
if Mr. Berman is available on the line to adopt my testimony. Yes. Good morning Mr. Berman. Could
you state your name please and spell for the court reporter? Yes Paul Berman. P -A -U -L -B -E -R -M -A -N.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth?
Counsel?
Mr. Berman, have you been on the call here listening to my testimony regarding the property, 1128 South 52nd Street?
And would you adopt my testimony as your own if you were able to, if you were testifying?
And have I missed anything, or is there anything additional that you'd like to add to the board in support of your zoning application in this matter?
No, nothing else to add.
questions from questions from the board. No, Mr. Chairman, questions or comments from the
virtual audience? I see no hands, Mr. Chair. Planning Commission. Thank you, Chair Bergman,
and good morning. Mr. Chair, I'm sorry. I have Mr. Paul Berman, who's been allowed to speak.
please forgive the interruption
okay um state your name please and spell for the court reporter
jason is your hand up full berman he's been allowed to speak already mr berman
are you still present yes i'm here yes do you have anything else to add mr berman
Oh, no, no, no, nothing else.
Okay, thank you.
Thank you very much.
Planning Commission.
Thank you, Chair Bergman.
David Vecto with the City Planning Commission.
Mr. Chairman and board members, the comprehensive plan recommends no change to the residential single -family zoning at this location.
This property currently has a rental license for one dwelling unit.
There is no unique physical condition or circumstance that would prevent this property from being used in conformance with the zoning code.
However, the appellant has shown that the nature of the block has changed to a mix of single and multifamily units.
The proposal matches the character of the block.
The City Planning Commission recommends that the board grant the proposed use variance for three dwelling units.
Thank you. MI 2022 -007 -125 -1128 South 52nd Street, I vote yes.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes.
Thank you, Mr. Toppin.
Thank you, members of the board. Thank you, Mr.
Okay. Number
seven, MI
2022 -007 -333 -
South A Street.
Nicholas George is the attorney.
We have letter of
non -opposition from Passion Square
Civic and letter of non -opposition
and Letter of Non -Opposition from Council Member Squilla.
from Council Member Squilla.
Mr. George.
You'll be rejoining as a panelist, sir.
Thank you.
Good morning, Mr. George.
Do we see him, Jason?
Yes, he's being promoted, Chair.
Okay, thank you.
Oh, hi. Good morning, Mr. George. Could you state your name, please, and spell for the
court reporter? Yes, sir. It's Nicholas George, N -I -C -H -O -L -A -S -G -E -O -R -G -E.
You swear or affirm the whole truth and nothing but the truth? I do.
Could you identify your clients in relationship to the property?
Yes, I'm here on behalf of Louis Gangora and Hannah Gaudete.
They are the tenants.
And our vice chair has a few questions for you, sir.
Good morning, counsel.
Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Have you emailed in all the required documents and exhibits that are needed to proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing?
I have.
Thank you. Please proceed and share your screen.
Thank you. Can you see my screen?
We can.
Oh, sorry. This is the wrong one. Let's see here. Let me try again.
Let's try again. Okay, there we go.
uh good morning so i i represent um the proposed tenants at 11 55 south 8th street um this this
property uh here's the notice of refusal um i'd like to point out that uh historically uh so this
this relates to the first floor at a at a corner property the historically this property was used
for uh an office this this space was used for an office space um it was it was previously a pharmacy
um the the current uh current zoning is is rsa5 um and the the tenants uh proposed to
open up a ceramics shop and coffee shop. Basically, the concept being that people from
the community that live in the neighborhood can come in. The slogan is have a mug, make a mug.
So essentially, you can make your own coffee mugs, you can make pottery, and then you can
have a coffee while you do so. We think that there is a need for an activity like this in
the neighborhood because this is a popular hobby for many in the area, and there aren't
many ceramic shops that are in the immediate vicinity. So this is a need for the community
to help promote seniors, family activities, arts, and I believe that that's why we received
the community support because the neighbors agreed with our presentation at the RCO meeting
that this is something that the community can participate and enjoy in. As you can see,
the community straw poll vote was 5 -0 in non -opposition. The committee voted 3 -0 in favor.
Let me show you a few pictures of the current building. This is the notice of the zoning posting. This is what 1155 looks like from the outside. As you can see, there's a separate entrance to the commercial space, the traditional commercial space.
um this is the current state of the building um it's it's pretty much set up and uh ready to go
um this is the this is the this is a garage area that's associated with the the first floor unit
where trash um would be stored as as well as storage and um and the the kilns for firing the
ceramics um letter of non -opposition this is the business plan um the
Um, letter of non -opposition. This is the business plan. Um, the concept is, as I said before, make a mug, have a mug, make a mug. Um, the concept of beyond ceramics is a coffee shop. The, um, the tenants, Lewis, uh, he's, he's an experienced, um, barista in Philadelphia. He's had experience roasting, um, coffee beans.
We'll be right back.
I just like to point out there will be no coffee roasting at the space and there will be no food preparation.
Any food that's sold is pre -prepared foods.
And, yeah, the concept is, you know, to serve families, to serve the community and to provide someone a safe and friendly activity.
The proposed hours would be daytime, 10 to 7, likely six days a week, potentially seven days a week if there's a need and demand.
And as I said before, the ceramics is a very popular activity in the region and in the area.
It's underserved because there aren't a lot of similar studios close by.
And it might it's something that could also serve the after the need for after school care, potentially family activities, birthday parties, something that that the that the that the neighbors were happy about and excited about.
I would like to point out there is some hardship to be aware of. The owner, Mr. Fung, has attempted to rent the air, rent the space for similar uses such as office space.
The only interest that he received was was more impactful uses such as a bakery, some interest for a bakery, some interest for a butcher, some interest for a deli.
And, you know, the reality is that the neighborhood probably doesn't need another bodega.
And, you know, certainly a butcher has more impactful use than than a coffee shop and an art and an art studio.
And the uses is consistent with the historical use of the of the building.
I the the the tenants are available should be available for any questions.
This is just the layout. So the this is the this is the front door, South East Street.
You you would walk in. There's a the coffee bar area and retail area.
Then there's the clay workshop and classes area. You have the existing bathroom.
And then this is the storage facility in the garage area. Trash can be maintained inside.
We plan to do commercial trash pickup as needed once to twice a week.
And there's no planned impact on the vicinity. We expect that most of the customers would be
pedestrian, walking customers. We don't foresee a need to impact the parking or the density of
the neighborhood. The tenants are here that can answer any questions as well as a ceramics expert
who can answer any questions. I'm not sure if the owner of the property is on the call. He had
another commitment, but we've represented the owner of the property historically as well. So
I have personal knowledge as to the matters that I'm testifying to. And I ask that the board adopt
my testimony and um and um why don't why don't we have one of your uh clients come on and adopt
your testimony thank you hannah lewis you available
they've been about to speak hi sir could you uh uh state your name and spell it please for the
court reporter. Hi, this is Hannah Gaudit, H -I -N -N -A -H -G -A -U -D -I -T -E. Right. Do you
swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth? I do. Proceed,
counsel. Hannah, is anything that I testify to inaccurate or needing revision or correction?
no would you agree that my statements were truthful and consistent with um your plan to
operate the business proposed business yes okay thank you questions from the board no
Thank you. Questions from the board? No, Mr. Chair.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
No further answer, Mr. Chair. Planning Commission.
Thank you, Chair Bergman, and good morning, board members.
David Fecto with the City Planning Commission.
The comprehensive plan recommends no change to the residential single -family zoning at this location.
the applicant has shown that the configuration of the ground floor is consistent with a proposed
commercial use. The City Planning Commission recommends the board grant the use variances
for a prepared food shop and multiple principal uses on the lot, but deny the variance for limited
industrial use. Thank you. MI 2022 007333 1155 South A Street, I vote yes.
Thomas Holman, my vote is yes.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes.
Thank you, counsel.
Thank you.
Okay, number 12, MI 2022 -007 -054 -3103 Euclid Street.
Lynn Nichols is the attorney.
letter of support from strawberry mansion cdc with proviso
should we be joining this panelist sir okay good morning chair and good morning members of court
good morning miss nichols could you state your name please and spell for the court reporter
lynn nichols l -y -n -n last name n -i -c -h -o -l -s right do you swear or affirm to tell the truth
the whole truth and nothing but the truth yes i do could you identify your client the relationship
to this property brian watson and he's the he's the owner of the owner of the property okay our
Good morning, counsel. Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its
accuracy? I agree to waive it. It is inaccurate in one respect. It has the Philadelphia Housing
Authority as the owner of the property, and that's not accurate. Okay. But I waive it in
all other respects. Okay, no problem. Have you emailed then all the required documents
and exhibits that are needed to proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing?
Yes, and I emailed Hillary an amended packet last night with some documents that she had requested.
Thank you. Please proceed and share your screen. You're welcome. Before I begin, Chair, can I ask
if there are any interested persons in the audience that intend to testify in this matter?
You can. Are there any? Are there any hands, Jason?
No, it's any hands at this time, sir. Thank you. Council, I have one question. I know you said the name still states Philadelphia Housing Authority, but do you have this project has anything to do with the PHA?
No, he bought the property from PHA. So you can see that I'm scrolling to it. I hadn't shared my
screen yet. On the deed, you'll see that it was a transfer from the Philadelphia Housing Authority
to BJA Real Estate LLC, which he is the owner of. Okay. Thank you. No problem.
You're welcome. May I share my screen? You can. Thank you.
All right. Can you see my screen here?
We can.
All right. So in this packet, there is the petition of appeal form, which indicates that this project will not increase traffic congestion.
It won't substantially or permanently harm neighbors.
And this is the least variance that we are seeking in terms of the code to provide relief.
We're seeking a two -family dwelling in an existing structure. The hardship here is that the neighborhood has changed in character from mainly single -family to multiple -family units.
right next door to 3103, 3105 Euclid was a single family and is now a duplex that was granted in
2016. There are other multiple family units on the block as well, 3114, I believe, and also 3100.
You see our zoning permit. Here's the deed, which shows that this was a
You see our zoning permit. Here's the deed, which shows that this was a property transferred from the Philadelphia Housing Authority to BJA Real Estate LLC.
see. The certificate of tax clearance is here. We mailed notices to 172 near neighbors and the RCO
meeting was held on April 27th. In attendance at the RCO meeting, we received our letter of support
after showing that the owner intended to make sure
that this property was for affordable housing units
in this area.
You can see here in the photos,
looking to the right of the property,
and this photo is looking to the left of the property.
We have a photo showing the front view of 3103
right here on the corner with the zoning notice
on the green door.
um i'm gonna use a different screen for the plans here we have the plans for the property the first
floor would be a single apartment with a kitchen closet bedroom the second floor is a split level
apartment which has the kitchen on the second floor and the bedrooms on one bedroom on the
second floor and two bedrooms on the third floor as well as a bathroom. The RCO wanted to make sure
that the property did not present an issue of trash. So we agreed to provide them with a proviso
which is attached showing a sanitation plan which says that the tenants will keep trashing containers
in the rear until collection and the perimeter will be clean as well as they wanted renderings
of what the property looked like once it was completely renovated and we did provide those
to them and they therefore then gave us a letter of support which is attached here showing that
there were seven out of the nine people who attended the meeting seven supported it and two
opposed it and they also put in there what they had asked us to provide them with
so again we're asking for multi -family dwelling variance in this property in a neighborhood
which has become mixed use single family and multi -family at this time chair I would like
to call Bryant Watson okay Mr. Watson are you in the audience
he's been allowed to speak. Mr. Watson could you state your name please and spell for the court
reporter? Uh uh uh Watson. B -R -Y -A -N -T Watson. W -A -T -S -O -N. I'm sorry can you hear me? Yeah it's a little
little little garbled but spell your last name. Spell your last name. Watson. W -A -T -S -O -N.
Right. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I did. Proceed, counsel. Thank you. Mr. Watson, are you here on behalf of BJA Real Estate
LLC? Yes, I am. And what is your relationship to the company? I'm actually the owner of the
company. Okay. And Mr. Watson, did you hear my testimony and presentation given here today?
yes and i agree with everything you said okay thank you that's my question um does anyone
on the board or the chair have any questions questions from the board
no mr chairman no chair questions or comments from the virtual audience
i see no answer mr chair planning commission thank you chair bergman and good morning david
defecto with the City Planning Commission. Mr. Chairman and board members, the comprehensive
plan recommends no change to the residential single -family zoning at this location. This is
a primarily multifamily block face, so the proposed two dwelling units matches the character of the
block. The City Planning Commission recommends that the board grant the use variance for two
dwelling units. Thank you. MI 2022 -007 -054 -3103 Euclid Street. I vote yes with proviso. Trash
stored in rear of property. Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes with proviso. Ishmael Shahid, my vote
is yes with proviso. Thank you, counsel. Thank you. Is there anyone in the virtual audience?
Thank you, counsel. Thank you. Is there anyone in the virtual audience
whose morning case has not been called?
Mr. Chair, I was going to say number 15. Okay.
Oh, my fault. I'm sorry. Okay. Okay. MI 2022 007 051 243 to
45 South Camac Street. Darwin Bovee is the attorney. Letter of non -opposition from Washington
Square Civic Association. Letter of non -opposition from Council Member Squilla. Sorry about that.
I'm back as a panelist. Okay.
Good morning, Mr. Bovee. Could you state your name, please, and spell for the court reporter?
yes yes uh darwin beauvais b -e -a -u -v as in victory a -i -s as in sam uh representing the
ownership uh red husky llc which is a subdivision of the tavern group um thank you for for finally
recognizing us i felt like a redheaded you swear or affirm the general truth the whole truth and
nothing but the truth. I do, Mr. Chairman. And also in the audience, there's Stephen Carlino,
the owner, as well as Scott Ritchie, the architect. Okay. Could you, our vice chair has just a few
questions. Good morning. Good morning, counsel. Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal
and stipulate to its accuracy? Yes, I do. Have you emailed in all the required documents and
exhibits that are needed to proceed with this case five days in
advance of this hearing? Yes, we have. Thank you. Please proceed
and share your screen.
Mr. Chairman, members of the board, again, my name is Darwin
Beauvais. And for the record, we are offering an exhibit package
from 1 to 13 that includes our refusal, deeds, site plans, appropriate code sections, as well
as our letter of support from the community. This project, in essence, is for the erection
of a one -story addition to accommodate a new walk -in cooler, which is accessory to an existing
restaurant. And it's all within RM1 zoning class cases. Now, by way of background, I mentioned
earlier, Tavern on Green, Tavern on Comet is the name of the restaurant. And again, it's a
subsidiary of the Tavern Group, which owns several restaurants throughout the city. And we have the
owner here, Mr. Steven Carlino.
Now, our receiver, as you can see,
it's really just for open space.
And we're asking the board to grant our application.
Mainly, let's start with the site plan.
Our site plan, if you can look at the zoning chart,
in essence, so you can at least get a quick understanding of the numbers. We were limited
to 75%. However, this restaurant has been in existence for almost 90 years, and it's always
occupied 80 % of its lot. What we're proposing by building this addition to have a walk -in cooler,
we are taking three percent, an additional three percent. Now, just by way of our site plan,
this is what we are looking at. And I can show you photos, but I definitely would like the board
to see where we physically sit. So here's to max three. That's the entrance. In order to get to
where you have to walk down the street, make a right, and make another right onto Fawn Street.
There's existing structures to the left and to the right, but our structure, you would see in
photos, just has sensing to protect the public as well as to protect the commercial privacy
and activities on that lot.
There is a set of stairs, and in essence,
And in essence, we are just looking to add this walk -in cooler in this area where my hand is floating.
we are just looking to add this walk -in cooler in this.
I believe we can, you can see with our proposed site plan, this is what we're adding right here.
Now, like I mentioned before, this is a restaurant called Tavern on Camac.
And I would like the board to also note that this particular property has been a restaurant since 1936, and it's been in its current form since 1946.
So we believe our use has been well -established.
I believe the open space was never at 75 % because of the renovations that took place in 1946.
Let's go to the photo.
Here's the front of the building.
Very good -looking restaurant.
if i might add good food um here we are just looking towards the east
and as i mentioned we had to turn around the corner
you see how we are in releasing to other properties and then we get to the rear
this structure here where my hand is floating is not our property it is where the fence is
And what I still do on our site plan, I think when you see the – when you look beyond
our yellow poster, you'll see a blue bin that our walk -in cooler is going to extend
out to there.
I'll give you another view.
view. This is what our intention is. We'll build this structure here, and it will only
be accessible from inside. Again, this is how this treat is used. I'm not going to say
as an alleyway, but it is definitely used for a lot of back office
or logistics, if you will.
And that is another view from the opposite side.
So in essence, we did meet with the RCO on April 25th
of this year and they concluded that they should that they will give us support but not opposing
our project. They did also make concerns which we're more than happy to do to I guess
make sure that our addition is aesthetically pleasing. They did suggest painting. We're not
too sure if that will be the case, but we definitely want to make sure that we work with
the community since we are sitting in the community and the community patronizes us.
So having said all of that, we're taking the position that we have no negative impact by
providing this, by expanding our cooler. We're looking to do this. Why? Because there are supply
pain issues we even know that this group has done a phenomenal job surviving the pandemic
there were supply chain issues and by having a walk -in cooler where we're trying to alleviate
or find some relief to make sure that that doesn't happen again um as i told you from the site plan
everything is done on site we don't spill over into into the right of way at all this cooler will
We'll continue that tradition, and because the RCO does support us, we're asking that
the board here grant our application, and with that, I would love to call Mr. Carlino
up to the panelists, and if that's possible, I would like for him to adopt my testimony.
Mr. Carlino.
Mr. Carlino has been about to speak.
Hi, Mr. Carlino, could you state your name, please, and spell it for the court reporter?
yeah steven carlino s -t -e -p -h -e -n c -a -r -l -i -n -o right do you swear or affirm to tell the truth
Yeah, Stephen Carlino, S -T -E -P -H -E -N.
the whole truth and nothing but the truth i do proceed counsel great mr carlino did you hear
everything that i i stated before the board i did and would you adopt that as your testimony should
you could you have been testifying yes i would all right but that will open themselves up for
questions questions from the board notes here no mr chairman questions or comments from the virtual
audience you know further hands mr chair planning commission thank you chair bergman and good
morning. David Fecto with the City Planning Commission Chair and Board members. The
comprehensive plan recommends no change to the residential multifamily zoning at this location.
The proposed occupied area is within 10 % of the required area in the zoning code. The proposed
variance is in keeping with the spirit of the code and matches the approximate occupied area
of other lots on this block. The City Planning Commission recommends the Board grant the
dimensional variance for maximum occupied area.
Thank you.
MI 2022 007051, 243 to 45 South Camac Street, I vote yes.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes.
Thank you, counsel.
Thank you.
Good to see everyone.
Is there anyone in the virtual audience whose morning case
has not been called?
Mr. Chair, excuse me, Mr. Chair, this is Hillary. I just had a brief update to
our announcement on MI -2022 -007 -137 -454 Delmar Street. We will now be voting on that matter
today on the 2 p .m. list. Okay, thank you. So MI -2022 -007 -137 -454 Delmar Street, we will be
voting 2 p .m.? Yes, Mr. Chair, today. We were voting on that 2 p .m. today. Thank you. Is there
anyone whose case has not been called? No hands, Mr. Chair. Okay. See everybody at 2 p .m. Thank you.
Thank you, by the way, LaKeisha.
Good afternoon. My name is Bill Bergman, and I will be chairing the ZBA hearing today at 2 p .m.
With me is our Vice Chair, Ismail Shahid.
Present, Mr. Chairman.
Our Board Member, Thomas Holloman.
Present, Mr. Chairman.
And our Alternate Board Member today from Development Services, Emily Persico.
Present, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you.
Also present is Hillary Emerson, our Attorney, and Tanya Sunkett, our Executive Director.
Here's our virtual format.
Be advised.
The proceedings are being recorded.
Video will be available by contacting TanyaSunkett at philo .gov.
For the benefit of our court stenographer, we ask attorneys and witnesses to identify themselves before testifying.
If you are participating by phone and you wish to testify, press star 9 to raise your hand and star 6 to unmute.
To enter an appearance statement, call 267 -270 -5548.
4548. Leave your email and the address of the property in question. And finally, the question
answer box on the screen is not for comments or testimony. All comments should be directed to our
Executive Director, Tanya Summel. Let's look at the continuances that we have this afternoon.
Number seven, MI 2022 -004 -684 -9800 Busselton Avenue, Parcel B. This case is continued.
Number eight, MI 2022 -005 -364 -2537 North 32nd Street.
This case is continued.
And number 13, MI 2022 -001 -797 -2600 Montgomery Avenue.
That case has been continued.
Does anyone have any comments relative to the cases that have been continued?
Good afternoon, Mr. Chair. I have a hand up by Ms. Mary Friend. I have allowed her to speak at this time, sir.
Could you state your name, please, and spell for the court reporter?
Yes, sir. My name is Mary Friend. M -A -R -Y -F -R -I -E -N -D.
M -A -R -Y -F -R -I -E -N -D.
Right.
Right.
Do you?
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, sir, I do.
What case are you interested in?
I'm interested in 9800 Busselton Avenue, number seven.
Could I be notified when the continuance date would be?
Yes, we will let you know where the continuance is.
I appreciate your time.
Thank you.
All right.
No, thank you.
Thank you for calling in.
Are there any other requests for continuances?
i see no further hands mr chair so we're going to go to cases that we do not have exhibits for
number four mi 2022 004 690 300 to 02 south street is the attorney here meredith trego
if you're in the virtual audience please raise your hand
i have a hand up by miss eileen quigley you want me to vote okay i understand hi could you state
your name please and spell for the court reporter good afternoon my name is eileen quigley e -i -l -e -e -n
q -u -i -g -l -e -y right i am eileen hold up one minute okay you're going to be coming back so
let me swear you in now do you swear for him to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but
the truth i do okay and martha's on leave yes she is and i apologize i did not hear the
the appeal number for that so it's sure sure it's mi 2022 004 690 300 02 south street
oh uh thank you that was um that appeal was withdrawn
okay all right thank you so mi 2022 004 690 300 02 south street the case has been withdrawn thank
you. You're welcome. Thank you. And then number 11.
MI 2022 005 336 2000 North 20 Street. No exhibits second listing.
i see no hands mr chair so mi2022 005336 2000 north 20 street
the attorney may be on leave i'm going to continue that but must be heard next time
And then number 14, MI2022 -007 -151 -431 -North 39th Street. Audrey Martinez is the listed applicant. No exhibits, first listing.
Again, Mr. Chair, no hands.
Okay, thank you. So MI -2022 -007 -151 -431 North 39th Street, this case is continued, must be heard.
And I have two other cases that have been withdrawn.
number two mi2022 -003 -395 -1510 north 25th street is david orphanetes in the in the in the audience
yes sir i have allowed him to speak okay mr orphanetes could you state your name for the
record? Certainly. Can you hear me? We can, sir. Certainly. It's David Orphanides, O -R -P -H -A -N -I -D -E -S.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
I do. Is that case being withdrawn, sir? At the direction of my client, yes. I'd like to have the
case marked this withdrawn and the appeal withdrawn. Yes. Thank you very much. MI 2022 -003 -395 -1510
and North 25th Street, that case has been withdrawn.
Thank you, counsel.
Thank you, sir. May I be excused?
You can, sir.
Thank you.
And number 12, MI 2022 -004893, 6600 North 12th Street,
that case has been withdrawn.
We're going to go to our add -on list.
We're going to go to our add -on list.
MI, number one, MI 2022, 007, 130, 160, 264, North 2nd Street.
I vote yes for reconsideration and rehearing.
Thomas Tolman, my vote is yes for reconsideration and rehearing.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes for reconsideration and rehearing.
Right. Number two, MI 2023 -000259 -90 -Rochelle Avenue. I vote yes with proviso. Temporary
Variance expires 6 -1 -26 and Commercial Trash Pickup three times a week.
Tom Salman, my vote is yes with proviso.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes with proviso.
Number three, MI -2023 -000 -254 -9122 -Dews Street, I vote yes with proviso. Revised plans, three pages, stamped by ZBA on May 24th, 2023.
free. Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes with provisals. Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes
with provisals. Number four, MI 2023 -002 -604 -2352 North 29th Street, I vote no.
thomas holland my vote is no ishmael shaheed my vote is no
and number five mi2022 -007 -137 -454 delmar street i vote yes
we're going to go to our regular list we're going to start with number six
MI 2023 000403 725 North 16th Street Sean Whalen is the attorney
we have recommendation of support from the united franceville civic association
sorry sir mr whalen will be coming back in those panels thank you
hi mr whalen could you please state your name and spell for the court reporter
Yes. Good morning, Chairman. Sean Whalen, W -H -A -L -E -N.
You swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Could you identify your client and relationship to this property?
Sure. I am representing Mount Fair Associates, the owner of the property.
Okay. And our vice chair has just a few questions, sir.
Of course.
Good afternoon, counsel.
So do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Yes, I do.
Have you emailed in all the required documents and exhibits that are needed to proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing?
Yes, I did.
Thank you.
Please proceed and share your screen.
All right.
Thank you very much.
So Sean Whalen from Vintage Law here on behalf of Mount Fair Associates, we're handling the cases under 725 North 16th Street, the property with the blue notification signal here on the aerial map that hopefully you're seeing.
It actually includes 725 and 27 North 16th Street, both of which are owned by Mount Fair Associates.
um both properties currently are improved with triplexes each with two bedrooms and the proposed
project you can see here is mid -block on north 16th street we're about a block off of ridge
um to the to the east here and we're right in between swain and brown streets you can see right
here i've highlighted for you uh there's a little bit of glare um highlighted for you the two
buildings next door here's a better symbol so you can see these
uh next door here's a better symbol so you can see these buildings built out over most of the
property and um their existing condition which is in very poor condition significantly you can see
the rco letter uh overwhelming support and i will note and i'll touch on it later their support was
based on representation, which we will include as a proviso today, that the two additional units
that we're asking for, that's to put a conclusion in the beginning, we are asking for two additional
units is basically the variance we're seeking. And we are seeking to put both of those additional
units as affordable housing units under the code provisions. And with that representation and
proviso, the Francisville neighbors were in overwhelming support. These properties are all
zoned RM1. And here you can see this is a front image of the two properties in question. This is
727 on the left and 725 on the right. I zoom out. This is an existing building of 10 units,
45 feet tall, that used the moderate income housing bonus. This was also owned and developed
by Mount Fair Associates. What we are seeking to do today is we can build a six -unit building
by right at 725 to 27 North 16th. And what we seek to do is to, instead of building a six -unit
building with an additional elevator and two new stairwells we would seek to use the stairwells
and elevator in the adjacent building of the same owner at 721 to 23 north 16th street and
what happens is in that building it does not change we have no dimensional variances required
the same building would be built. Removing the two stairwells that are required by code
and the elevator that would be required by code leaves enough extra floor area in the new proposed
building for two additional units. As I said before, that's the variance we're seeking is
we can build six units by right with two stairwells and an elevator. Instead, we would
like to build an eight -unit building at 725 to 27, we would then use the two stairwells and the
elevator at 721 to 23. And the two additional units that we could then put into 725 with that
additional space would be affordable housing units. You can see, again, this is immediately
across the street. This is a very mixed neighborhood of high -density residential and
low -density residential. You can see entirely built out block by block. This is looking north.
This is looking south. And again, you can see additional new construction being built just
down the block for significant units. So again, what we're seeking to do is actually,
in order to do this, our new building would be considered an addition as opposed to just
new construction because it would not stand on its own. It would utilize, again, the elevator
and stairwells of the existing building. So this is the approved consolidation plan, what you see
here. So our application before you today is one to consolidate 721 through 27 North 16th Street
into this large parcel that you see on the right. That would then allow us to build an addition onto
that existing building and utilize that extra space. So here's what we're doing. This is the
existing building. It's much larger and much taller than the building we're proposing. The
building we're proposing, again, meets all dimensional requirements. It does not exceed 38
feet. We are not seeking to use any bonuses, and we don't need any open area or any other kinds of
variances. Rather, here's the notice of refusal, and the only issue that we have is for those two
additional units that we're seeking. Again, we are allowed to put in six new units at that building,
and we are seeking to instead put in eight because we'll be using
And we are seeking to instead put in eight because we'll be using the stairwells and existing elevator in the current building adjacent to us.
And again, the RCO felt strongly comfortable that based on the representation that those two new units will be affordable housing units,
they were strongly in support and very excited for additional affordable housing to be brought into the neighborhood, which is a serious issue in the neighborhood.
So, with that, I would rest and just call my client to adopt my testimony.
Board Chair, do you have?
Yeah, sure.
What's your client's name?
Oh, sorry.
I couldn't hear you.
Mr. Eric Reisner should be on.
Yes, I'm here.
Mr. Reisner, could you state your name spelled, please, for the court reporter?
Eric Reisner, E -R -I -K -R -E -I -S -N -E -R.
Right. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Proceed, counsel.
Thank you. Mr. Reisner, you're here on behalf of the owner, Mount Fair Associates, today, correct?
And have you heard all of the testimony that I've already presented today?
And do you believe it true and correct to the best of your knowledge, information, and belief?
and would you would would you adopt that as your own testimony yes thank you very much
questions from the board no mr chair yes mr chairman uh council council will the additional
two units uh
I'm sorry, Mr. Hallman, I heard two units something.
Will the two units be deed restricted?
Yes, we are happy to work with the city and have them be deed restricted.
So it is our intention that the additional two units would fall under the same code requirements as the moderate income housing bonus requirements would.
and we would enter into a deed restriction, which I believe is at 25 years. It may be 30 years now.
And we would enter into that and the two affordable housing units would be part of a
proviso so that we would be required to do it per the zoning code approval and also with that deed
restriction. Yes. Thank you. Welcome. Time for the question. Questions or comments from the
virtual audience. Mr. Chair, this is Hillary. I have a question and a comment. One, I just wanted
to clarify for the record that we cannot provide so affordable units. That's not something the
zoning board can do. And second, I just wanted to ask Mr. Waylink, I was very confused how the
refusal was written. So there's now a proposed total of 18 units between the existing building
the one that's being constructed plus the addition. Is that correct?
Yes. So what happens is the original building was built and approved and utilized the moderate
income housing bonus and height bonus at that location. We are not seeking to do that at all
here. But since we are combining all four of the properties together in order to make this
addition, then the reviewer, the examiner properly had to calculate how many units would be allowed
as of today for the total site. Even though the 10 units is already approved, already built,
as you can see, it's just about to be finished and rented. So what happens is we are looking for,
we can build six units by right on the 725 to 27. And instead, we are seeking to build eight
there with the two being affordable. Thank you. Thank you.
Hillary, on that same note, Hillary, if we can't do affordable, can we just say
two additional units? Well, we don't need to say additional units. That's in the refusal.
Okay. So the refusal is written kind of confusing. The addition is for eight additional units for a total of 18 units between all of the lots combined.
I'm fine. Okay. Thank you.
Thanks.
Board chair, if it would make you more comfortable, I was not aware we couldn't make it a formal proviso. I will represent as an officer of the court and in front of this board that we will proceed with the deed restriction, as I've already stated to Mr. Holloman's questions.
all right thank you very much um questions or comments from the virtual audience
All right, thank you very much.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
you know for the uh plans i'm sorry planning commission good afternoon chair bergman david
facto with the city planning commission mr chairman and members of the board the comprehensive
plan recommends no change to the residential multi -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 recommends the board deny the
variance from the lot area requirements of the code we also note that the mixed income housing
bonus is no longer available in the fifth council district the mixed income neighborhoods overlay is
also not available in the count fifth council district and affordable units in a community
agreement cannot be enforced by any city agency. Okay, so thank you. MI 2023, 000 -403 -725
North 16th Street. I vote yes, proviso. Revised plans, one page, stamped by CBA, May 24th, 2023.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes, with proviso.
Ishmael Shaheen, my vote is yes with Proviso.
Thank you, Mr. Whalen.
Thank you very much.
May I be excused?
You can.
Have a great day.
We're going to go to number, thank you very much.
We're going to go to number five, MI 2022 -007 -371 -406 West Somerville Avenue.
Medridalia Cordero Corporano is the owner pro se.
This application is for a two -family household living in an existing structure. The proposed
two -family household living is prohibited in the RS3 zoning district, whereas two parking
spaces are required in the RSA3 zoning district and none are proposed. Letter of support from the
42nd ward executive committee and letter of support from council member Phillips.
Do we see a hand?
Do not see anyone answering to that name in the virtual audience.
Maria Dalia Cordero Corporan.
no one no sir okay all right mr chair this is this is hillary um in in this case i the contractor
had submitted the materials um and i wasn't aware that it was that that the applicant had been the
contractor until today he was advised that he would need the owner present to proceed so it
maybe that the owner was not available. Okay, good. All right. Thank you. So MI 2022 -007 -371 -406
West Somerville Avenue. This case is continued, must be heard.
We're going to go to number one, MI2023 -000 -466 -2523, Survivor Street, Alan Nockamson is the attorney,
letter of opposition from Old Richmond Civic, and letter of opposition from Council Member Squill.
All right, sure. Thank you.
Good afternoon, Mr. Chair and members of the board.
Just for the record, can you spell your name?
Alan, A -L -A -N, last name Nochumson, N -O -C -H -U -M -S -O -N.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Could you identify your client and their relationship to this property?
Yeah, my client is the owner of the property, Fishtown Properties, LLC, and in a virtual audience is Emily Barker, its member.
Our vice chair has just a few questions.
Good afternoon, counsel. Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate towards accuracy?
Have you emailed in all the required documents and exhibits that are needed to proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing?
Yes, we have.
Thank you. Please proceed and share your screen.
Thank you.
So we're here to present 2523 Sebiva Street.
In our presentation materials, you'll first see the notice of refusal.
In our presentation materials, you'll first see the notice of repeasal.
then the
Then the correspondence from the old Richmond Civic Association.
To be honest, we were a little surprised that we got a letter of opposition.
I personally attended this community meeting where 11 people in the audience voted in favor of this matter and five people voted in opposition.
And then there was one person within the affected area, my client's sister, Audrey Barker, who may be in the virtual audience, and she lives next, you know, she lives in the next block over.
So when we received the letter yesterday after weeks of asking for it, we were surprised that the letter indicated that no one from the affected area voted and there was no vote taken because it was a vote of 11 in support and five not in support with one of those 11 voted in support that was within the affected area.
What we're seeking to do is basically legalize Airbnb short -term accommodation use.
We're not increasing the density in this property.
This is an RSA 5 property.
We're asking for single -family use.
My client purchased this property because she has family in the area and she visits Philadelphia quite often.
So they're looking, instead of having to rent a hotel for them and their family, like my client would stay there, and she expects to use the facilities for approximately two months out of the year, and in order to offset the cost of a mortgage, insurance, or real estate taxes, she's just asking to be able to use it for short -term accommodations 10 months out of the year.
She understands the position of this board that she won't be able to get a permanent variance because this use runs with the land, but she's asking for a temporary variance of three to five years under the circumstances.
If she's unable to get this variance, she's unfortunately going to have to sell this property.
But as I stated, her sister lives around the corner.
They have large family gatherings.
There's a lack of visitor accommodation use in the area.
There are some, not a lot, and we'll go over that, which is our next exhibit.
Then we'll review maps of the area and photographs of the property.
We're in the Old Richmond section of Philadelphia.
Then our plans and drawings, you know, just a basic floor plan, two bedrooms, one bath, nothing extravagant, but nice.
Our plans, in addition to our plans and drawings, our RCO meeting notice.
Again, we had 16 people vote at that meeting, one of which was within the infected area.
our application for appeal or a deed to the property, showing that my client's LLC,
Fishtown Properties LLC owns the property, and a certificate of tax clearance showing that she's
in good standing. At the conclusion of my presentation, I'll ask Ms. Barker to virtually
raise her hand, be sworn in, and she'll adopt my testimony as her own. Again, this is an RSA -5
property. All we're trying to do is visit accommodation use. So we're not changing
really the use of this property, you know, conceptually.
It's single -family use, and that's how we're looking to use it.
Instead of a long -term basis of 30 days or more renting at a time,
it's on a short -term basis.
And it has more so than, it's not really an investment property.
A client and her family visit, you know, Philadelphia often.
Her sister lives around the corner.
They just need a place to stay.
And there is a dearth of visitor accommodations within the Old Richmond area.
Again, in order to offset the cost of real estate taxes, mortgages, and insurance, she just needs this use, and she hopes that the board would agree to provide her a temporary variance.
and then the correspondence from the um old uh richmond civic association um again i i dispute
the fact that no people attended a meeting and you know were voted or that there wasn't someone
within the affected area her sister lives around the corner um whether or not they count did not
count her vote because um you know she's related to the applicant i don't know but there were 10
other people who who supported this project uh so i'm a little surprised that we got a letter of
opposition and then nearby airbnbs there are some so it's not out of character to have um visitor
accommodation use close by and i'll say this that when i attended the meeting one of the people in
the audience because this is a in -person meeting one of the people in the audience actually stated
his support because he stated the same thing, that there's not a lot of hotel use of a traditional
sense nearby, and that he always has difficulty when family and friends are visiting to find
to find accommodations for them in the old Richmond section of Philadelphia. Instead,
accommodations for them in the old Richmond section of Philadelphia.
they have to then get a hotel in center city, which makes it difficult for them. So again,
there is use similar to what we're asking for, but I think there's even more needs for this type
of use in this section of Philadelphia. And then maps of the area again, you know,
We're on Sephiva Street, just off of Firth, and there is Sargent.
We're between Sargent and Firth, and also Tula.
And then just a Google map, cross -section of the city.
As you can see, there's ample public transportation.
From our experience, representing many applicants for Airbnbs,
what we see is there's actually the biggest issue with any use of a property is parking.
and here we're not increasing in density so single family on single family but what we found is even
better from our experience is that the people who are renting these airbnbs are usually again
from out of town where they don't want to deal with the hassle of a car so when they're flying
in they typically take uber or lyft so this type of use is going to actually have a benefit to the
community where it's going to open up some parking where parking may be used if it's for
long -term accommodations, like a traditional lease or if someone else owned this property
to live in. Photographs of the property, two -story structure. We're not changing the structure in any
way. Proof of posting for today's hearing. And then here's Sephiva to the right of the property,
Sephiva to the left of the property. Our plans and drawings, and we just had an architect draw it out,
but there's no changes in the exterior or interior facilities of this building structure.
So basic floor plan, you have a living room, a dining room, a kitchen. You go up a flight of
steps, you have bedroom number one, bedroom number two, and a bathroom. Again, it's not a heavy use
of the property. Just the difference is whether you rent it for less than 30 days or more than
30 days. And then our meeting was April 25th, 2023. It was a well -attended meeting. 16 people
voted, although it's not accounted for in the letter. 184 addresses were notified of this
meeting. Here are the list of the addresses. Proof of mailing to those addresses. Our
application for appeal, our deed to the property, showing that Fishtown property's LLC is the owner.
And then showing our tax clearance, showing that my client owes no money to the city of Philadelphia
as it pertains to real estate taxes. With that being said, I would ask that Ms. Barker virtually
raise her hand and be sworn in.
Mr. Nockmson, how long has your client had the property?
She owned it in October of 2022.
She hasn't used it yet for visitor accommodations.
All right.
Thank you.
Hi, could you state your name, please, and spell for the court reporter?
Emily Barker, B as in boy, A -R -K -E -R.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Proceed, counsel.
Yes, Emily, you heard everything I had to state today about your zoning matter.
I did.
And is the term correct?
It is.
And do you adopt it as your own testimony?
All right, thank you.
Thank you.
Questions from the board?
No, Chair.
No, Mr. Chairman.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
No hands, Mr. Chair.
Planning Commission.
Thank you, Chair Bergman. David Vecto with the City Planning Commission. Mr. Chairman and board members, the comprehensive plan recommends no change to the residential single -family zoning at this location. For use variances, the appellant is required to demonstrate that the property cannot be used in strict conformity with the provisions of the code and that a variance is needed to enable viable economic use of the property.
There is no unique physical condition or circumstance of this property that would prevent it from being used in conformance with the zoning code, and so the City Planning Commission recommends that the Board deny this use variance for visitor accommodation.
Thank you. MI 2023, 004 -666 -2523 Survivor Street. I vote yes, would proviso. Temporary variance expires 525 -26.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes, with proviso.
Ishmael Shahid, my vote is yes, with provisor.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes, with proviso.
Thank you, counsel.
Thank you.
Thank you.
We're going to hear number three and number nine together.
Ishmael Shahid has recused himself.
Emily Presicchio will be our alternate board member.
So MI 2023, 001 -258 -1350, 1300 to 50 North 10th Street.
And also number nine is MI 2022, 006 -924 -1300 to 50 North 10th Street.
Eileen Quigley is the attorney.
There was an RCO meeting.
We do not have a letter as of yet.
I apologize, Chair Barber.
No, that's fine.
You've already been sworn.
Just for the record, state your name.
Yes, my name is Eileen Quigley,
Ballard Spar LLP 1735 Market Street Philadelphia PA 19103. And for the record could you identify
your client and the relationship to the property? In this case it is Philadelphia Housing Authority
and Philadelphia Housing Authority owns the property at 1300 to 15 North 10th Street.
Okay do you stipulate to the reading of to the not reading of the
the refusal? I do. And all your paperwork is within within five days? Correct. Share your
screen and proceed. Thank you. So good afternoon, Chair Bergman, members of the board. As I said,
I lean quickly. I'm here on behalf of Philadelphia Housing Authority with regard to the request for
these variances for these accessory signs. With me are Sammy Toshi, who is here for Perryman
Shoemaker, the developer, and project manager, Kyle Kernizek, and Amalia Gonzalez from the design
team from BLTA, and from PHA, Ken Granderson, and Leonard Ciccatella. We submitted our exhibits,
which include the deed certificate of tax clearance. Before I go any further, the notice
letters and other documents, but before I go any further, I would just like to put on the record
that notice letters were sent to the neighbors on 2 -8 -20 -23 and 3 -2 -20 -23, along with certificates
of mailing, and also sent to the RCOs with regard to an in -person RCO meeting that was
scheduled by the coordinating RCO, which is Yorktown Community Development Corporation.
uh the meeting was march 7th at 6 p .m we attended that meeting along with ken granderson from pha
william carter from perryman shoemaker as well as kyle kernizak from blta
we also posted the property and photos of the posting are at exhibit three
we have a notarized affidavit of posting if the board would like us to submit that after this
hearing. We have not received an RCO letter from the Coordinate ARCO memorializing the meeting that
took place in person on March 7th. We did reach out a number of times. On May 22nd, we also reached
out to Zoning Board Council, the council members representative, as well as Zoning Administration,
and asked them to confirm if they received an RCO letter.
And as of May 22nd, Zoning Board Council informed us
that they had not received an RCO letter.
So despite our outreach.
So with that, I would just like to move into the presentation
if that is satisfactory.
It is.
Thank you.
so we're here today with regard to two accessory signs uh by way of some background the philadelphia
housing authority had major renovations done to the harrison senior tower a few years ago
and those renovations included exterior and interior improvements and upgrades and they
modernized this building so along with that they had to remove the existing canopy
and replace that signage, and they remove the existing pylon sign.
pylon sign. And here we have renderings of what those new signs look like.
And here we have renderings of what those new signs look like.
So these signs were refused because there is no signage, no residential use signage permitted in
the RM2 zoning district. While multifamily housing is permitted, signs for that multifamily housing
residential use are not permitted. So these signs were refused for that as well as for
sign area and height setback and total sign area. So the proposed sign is a new monument sign and
it's about 14 feet, two inches high. It's about three feet wide with a total sign area of about
49 .75 square feet. This is a non -illuminated, non -internally illuminated sign, but there is a
small light fixture here that is focused directly on this sign and does not spill over either onto
the property, into the residences, or into the surrounding area. The canopy sign here, it's
about 66 and a half inches long and about 15 inches high. The original sign was six inches high,
So each of these separate signs is six inches high, but a total height of 15 inches.
And this is at the new canopy.
Give me one second.
I can show you what the existing signs look like.
So as you can see here, this is where the new pylon sign is.
This is where the canopy sign is.
This is the existing pylon sign here, and this was the existing entrance with the existing canopy sign or wall sign right there.
So as you can see, that was about six inches high.
So what the applicant is seeking are variances to allow this new signage.
We believe that if the variances are not granted, it would present a hardship to Philadelphia
Housing Authority as well as the residences.
Any visitors or transport that may take residences to and from the property, this variance will
not harm or cause any detriment to the public health, safety, or general welfare.
It will actually maintain the status quo because the signage is generally in the same
location as the existing signage. And also providing this signage is really a safety measure
for vehicular and pedestrian traffic. So with that, I would like to ask if Kyle Kurnozak can
be elevated so he can attest to the accuracy of my narrative and adopt my narrative as his own
testimony. Okay, sure. Sir, could you state your name, please, and spell it for the court
stenographer? Can you hear me? Yes, state your name, please, and spell it. My name is Kyle
Kurnacek, K -Y -L -E -K -E -R -N -O -Z -E -K. Right. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole
truth, and nothing but the truth? I do. Proceed, counsel. Thank you.
Mr. Knozak, you heard my narrative regarding the existing signage and our request for variances for the proposed signage.
And would you state for the board that that narrative was accurate?
And if you were permitted to testify, would that be what your testimony would be?
So would you adopt my narrative as your testimony?
I would.
Thank you, Mr. Knozak.
Counsel, questions from the board.
no mr chairman no mr chairman thank you um questions or comments from the virtual audience
asking no hands with the chair cleaning commission
good afternoon and thank you mr chairman david fecto with the city planning commission
mr chairman and board members the comprehensive plan recommends no change to the residential
multifamily zoning at this location. The appellant has not shown that an economic detriment would
accrue to the property if code -compliant signs are installed, so the City Planning Commission
recommends that the board grant the use variants to allow the appellant to continue to maintain
identification signs at this location, but deny the dimensional variants for those signs.
Thank you. MI 2023 -001 -258. Now, this is number three, by the way. MI 2023 -001 -258.
Now, this is number three, by the way. MI 2023 -001 -258 -1300 to 15 North 10th Street. I vote yes.
two five.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes.
Emily Briscoe, my vote is yes.
And number nine, MI 2022 -006 -924 -1300 to 15 North 10th Street. I vote yes.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes.
Emily Bresico, my vote is yes.
Thank you.
Chair Barbie, may I please move my exhibits into evidence?
You most certainly can.
Thank you.
Thank you.
That concludes my business.
May I please be excused?
You can.
Thank you.
Have a wonderful day.
Okay, you too.
Thank you.
Let's see here.
Let's see here.
Okay, MI 2023 -000 -467 -1439 South 6th Street.
Alan Notchamson is the attorney.
Recommendational support from the Dickinson Square Civic Association
and a letter of non -opposition from Council Member Squilla.
Ishmael Shahid will be back
for this case.
Nockamson? I'm back here.
Okay. Thank you. Mr. Nockamson,
just state your name for the record, please.
Alan Nockamson.
Could you identify who
your client is for this case and
their relationship to the property?
I'm sorry. Sixth Street Group, LLC,
and in the virtual audience is Brad Ennort, its member.
Okay, our vice chair has just a few questions.
Good afternoon, counsel.
Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal
and stipulate to a vacancy?
I actually object to the refusal.
It should state that all we're seeking to do
is add one additional unit to this five -unit building.
Okay, that's understood.
Have you emailed in all the required documents and exhibits that are needed to proceed with this case in advance of this hearing?
Yes, we have.
Thank you. Please proceed to share your screen.
Thank you.
Okay, so here we are at 1439 South 6th Street.
As you can see, this is a quintessential corner property in the city of Philadelphia, where you have the the angled first floor where you would expect to have a commercial unit here.
The reason why I objected to notice refusal is that you'll see a record.
There is a zoning permit as well as a housing inspection license for five residential units.
And then there's the one commercial unit where we're trying to just merely swap out the commercial use for residential use.
So this is a CMX1 property.
We're not trying to create six units.
We're only trying to legalize one residential unit.
And we'll review the notice of refusal.
We did get a letter of support from the Dickinson Square West Civic Association, as well as a letter of non -opposition from Councilmember Mark Squilla.
When we met with the group, you'll see that we received unanimous support, and I'll explain why that happened.
You'll also see the user registration permit, which shows the existing multi -family use of five units plus a commercial, as well as the housing inspection license, which is of record, which was just good through 2020, which shows five units, residential units.
maps of the area, photographs of the property, interior photographs. So again, you know, my
client tried to rent this property for some time as a commercial unit. Ultimately, he couldn't do
that. And, you know, we're trying to legalize this six unit, which is residential in nature now.
Our plans and drawings, and you'll see from there, this configuration of that commercial unit and
as the building as a whole too or you know commercial unit which we hope will be residential
our rco meeting notice our application for appeal or deeds of property showing us sixth street
group llc is the owner of the property and our certificate of tax clearance again in the virtual
audience is brad and art uh the owner's representative notice of refusal so again
this the applications for multi -family use of six dwelling units again it should have said which was
Again, it should have said, which was previously approved as five dwelling units and a commercial
previously approved as five dwelling units.
unit as well.
A letter of support, as you can see, it was unanimous.
It was a well -attended meeting of 12 individuals, and they all voted in support of this project.
Again, my client tried his hardest to rent this property out as a commercial unit.
This part of the neighborhood is really tough to rent out at least this property for commercial
purposes, and that's what we're asking.
to allow us to convert the commercial unit to a residential unit.
And again, the council member, council member Marzuela is also in non -opposition due to the community support.
And then the use registration permit, as you can see, it talks about like there was a commercial use looks like a party store in here at one point and five apartments.
And then it got turned into some type of game room, which two video machines in a pool hall, but still five units above.
And then this is the housing inspection license, which shows that there were five residential rental units from 2011 to 2020.
And then maps of the area, again, were a corner property on Dickinson and 6th Street.
And then just a Google map of the area as well. You can see there is some commercial use in the area, but it was rather difficult for my clients to rent this out.
And we're asking for that allowance to create that as a residential unit.
Photographs of the property. This is the front of the property from 6th Street, from Dickinson Street.
And then just the hearing, notice posters, proof of them being posted on both sides.
Then the property from South 6th Street to the right to the left.
Dickinson to the right to the left.
And then interior photos.
Again, there's no basement use here.
There's a responsible trash management and removal because we'll be using commercial trash pickup.
and we're a corner property so we can store the trash outside but these are photographs
of the unit itself and then our plans and drawings so my client completely gutted this
building out in you know you know when he purchased it a few years ago inside and out
he restored the front facade so many of these photos or these drawings pertain to that
renovation job. But here are the floor plans. Again, there's no access for the unit occupants
in the building for the basement. But, you know, the first floor plan, this is the unit that we're
legalizing. It's just a one -bedroom, one -bath, and has direct access from the outside. Then you have
unit number 1R, which is on the first floor, which is legal already, which has its own access.
And then the upper units have another door for separate access as well.
And then you can see we had our meeting March 21st at 6 p .m.
204 addresses were notified.
These are a list of the addresses.
Group of mailing to those addresses.
our application for appeal
that we follow on behalf of
6th Street Group LLC
our deed showing the 6th Group
LLC as the owner of the property
and finally
our certificate of tax plans where they
actually overpaid their taxes
this past year
so with that being said I would ask that
Mr. Enhart virtually
raise his hand to be sworn in
Chair, could you state your name, please, and spell for the court reporter?
Brad Enert, B -R -A -D -E -H -N -E -R -T.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Proceed.
Yes. Brad, you heard everything I had to state about your zoning matter.
And is it true and correct?
It is.
And do you adopt it as your own testimony?
yes i do thank you questions from the board
i'm sorry chair can i confirm that mr holliman said no no question i'm gonna i'm gonna get him
back one uh thomas could you vote again you you came off a little bit no no i think he was asking
I think he was asking about questions, not the vote.
about questions not the vote
All right.
Ishmael?
He dropped out here.
Pardon me?
He dropped out here.
Emily, are you on?
I have no questions.
All right.
Thank you.
Have any questions?
All right, questions or comments from the virtual audience?
I do not see any hints, Mr. Chair.
Planning Commission, please.
Thank you, Chair Bergman, and good afternoon, David Fecto with the City Planning Commission.
The comprehensive plan recommends a change in the zoning at this location to residential multifamily.
Planning staff are aware of five units already at the property, so this appears to be a legalization request.
The appellant is asking to swap a ground floor commercial unit with a residential unit.
As CMX -1 allows either a ground floor commercial space or a ground floor residential space,
the appellant's plan is in keeping with the intent of the CMX -1 zoning district.
So the City Planning Commission recommends that the board grant the use variance for six dwelling units.
Thank you.
MI -2023 -00467 -1439 South 6th Street, I vote yes.
Thomas Holloman, I vote yes.
Malia Briscoe, I vote yes.
Thank you.
Thank you, counsel.
Have a great day.
All right.
is there anyone in the virtual audience who uh was on the 2 p .m list and your case has not been
called chair i got kicked out i'm back that's okay thank you is there anyone do we see anyone
jason no sir okay so i i understand we have to take a break to 3 30 am i right
That's correct, Chair.
Okay, we will come back at 3 .30. Thank you, everyone.
All right, Chair.
Good afternoon. My name is Bill Bergman, and I will be chairing this afternoon's 3 .30 meeting.
With me is our Vice Chair, Ismail Shahid.
Present, Mr. Chairman.
Thomas Hollman, our Board Member.
Present, Mr. Chairman.
And our alternate board member, Emily Persico, from the Development Services.
Present, Mr. Chairman.
Also present is Hillary Emerson, our attorney, and our executive director, Tanya Sunkett.
Here's our virtual format.
Be advised, the proceedings are being recorded.
A video will be available by contacting TanyaSunkett at philo .gov.
For the benefit of our court stenographer, we ask attorneys and witnesses to identify themselves before testifying.
If you're participating by phone and you wish to testify, press star nine to raise your hand and
star six to unmute. When an appearance statement, call 267 -270 -5548. Leave your email and the
address of the property in question. And finally, the question and answer box on the screen is not
for comments or testimony. Any comments should be directed for our Executive Director Tanya
something. Let's look at our continuances for this afternoon. Number one, MI 2022 -001 -680 -5710
Malvern Avenue. That case has been continued. Is there anyone who has a comment relative to that
case? Good afternoon, Mr. Chair. I did not see any hands. Okay. I also have
also is there any other requests for continuances
once again mr chair i do not see any thank you and i have a few cases with no exhibits
number seven mi 2022 001 399 6642 marsden street no exhibits this case was marked must be heard
no answer thank you MI 2022 001 399 6642 Marston Street this was marked must be heard no one's
present I vote to dismiss Thomas Holloman I vote to dismiss Ishmael Shaheb I vote to dismiss
And number eight, MI202200378.
And number eight, MI -2022 -003 -782 -3907 -11 -North Free Street.
Is there anyone present from that location, from that listing?
No hands, Mr. Chair.
Thank you.
So MI -2022 -003 -782 -3907 -11 -North Free Street.
I vote to dismiss.
Thomas Holloman, I vote to
Mr. Thomas, can you vote again, please?
I'm sorry, Ish.
I'll vote one more time.
Thomas Holloman, I vote to dismiss.
Thank you.
Ish -emore Shaheed, my vote is to dismiss.
Thank you.
We're going to go to number two, MI -2022 -007 -297 -5222 West Columbia Avenue.
This is a pro se.
Mr. Chair, I will now miss Lisa Clark to be promoted as panelist.
Thank you.
Hello?
Hi. Hi. Hi. Could you state your name, please, and spell for the court reporter?
Lisa Clark, L -I -S -A -C -L -A -R -K.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Okay. Our vice chair has just a few questions, and then we'll start the case.
Good afternoon, ma 'am. Have you emailed in all the required documents and exhibits that are needed to proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing?
Thank you. Please proceed and share your screen.
Share my screen?
yeah you all these documents should be in your computer oh okay hold on one second okay
mr chair this is hillary did you read the refusal into the record
no i did not hillary uh i don't have a list of that yeah could you please do that it's not
my document sure this application is for two family household living in an existing structure
There is one use refusal. The proposed use to family household living is prohibited in the RSA 5 zoning district.
And we have a recommendation of support from Parkside Association of Philadelphia.
Mr. Clark, do you have everything in your computer?
Yes, we're sending it to you now.
That's it. That's it. OK, I see where you are. OK, so why don't you tell us what you want to do?
i would like um permission to have this as a legal two family okay i bought it and it was
supposed to be a two family as you can see looking at the pictures it has two entrances it had two
apartments two kitchens bathrooms and that's what i was told that it was and when i looked into it
further i was told that it was not but i bought it i'm sorry so you have other photos of your
property um yes we're putting it let me show some photos of your property showing that it is a duplex
those are the plans but he wants to see the well let me see you have plans show
whatever you can show me to show that this is an existing duplex okay showing the first floor
apartment
it was the first floor with the entrance to the left that's the first floor apartment
but I think he wants to see the picture.
You want to see it as it's existing now, sir?
Yes, how it exists now.
Could you please do that?
Hold on.
Here, if I may.
Here, if I may.
Please.
Please.
And Ms. Clark, we only still, okay, now your screen is.
And Ms.
I beg your pardon?
We was just only seeing that one picture, but now we can see that your screen is changing.
Yeah, we're going to go to, give us one sec here.
I'm just going to pull this up for.
Hold on a second, because my son is, he's part owner of the house too, so.
Oh, good afternoon, everyone.
so you so ms clark you're the only one can testify okay he can give you a little
instruction with your computer but you're the only one can testify yeah okay
okay so this is what you're doing now
no we're not doing anything we're we're um waiting for you guys to give us permission
to proceed from how it is to complete it what i'm saying is that look right now you're showing
me that you started to fit the work on the property right no they started it they they
you bought it from this is the way it was when you bought it yeah okay and i cleaned it out
all right okay on it because it was okay all right okay continue to show me some more photos
of this place.
Is that all downstairs?
That's all downstairs.
Okay. Do you have two electrical services
coming in here?
They put the things on there.
I don't know if...
What do you call your people out there?
L and I?
I think they have to go out there and do something.
There's two water heaters down in the basement.
And this is just two duplexes you have, two apartments.
Potential.
Nothing else in the building.
That's still the first four.
That is the second apartment.
You come up the steps to a second apartment.
Well, that second door on your right hand side.
All right.
You're coming.
and that's the third floor
how many apartments do you have here two two just two one second and second and third floor
yes and what's on the first second and third floor is one apartment okay all right it has
upstairs to it right okay and downstairs is just one one level okay and you bought the property
like this they were starting to work on it yes and he told me he put a new roof on he didn't
and leaked all the way through the house okay all right and what else oh and the back floor
was all rotten i fixed that okay okay that's the entrance right there to the second apartment
so all right so let me ask you this question when you're on the 5200 block of columbia are
there other multiple units yes many um i don't know but there are a few over there there's one
right next to me and when when did you purchase this property last august right okay and you you
bought it as a duplex yes that's what they sold it to me told me it was a duplex all right thank
you all right um and have you put will you posted this right for the you have a picture of the posting
um yes
then sent out letters and everything we had okay for the last meeting okay
okay all right okay and you went to your rco and they voted in your favor
yes sir okay thank you questions from the board
no yes mr chairman yes mr chair um for ma 'am for the the rear exit is there a um rear exit
Ma 'am, for the rear exit, is there a rear exit for the second and third floor?
For the third floor?
For the second apartment.
Not that I saw.
There will be.
I asked for plans, and they approved the plans, for me to put a patio up on the third floor to walk out for fire escape.
OK. OK, so you can install on the fire escape on the property.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
And we cleared out the back.
I'm sorry.
I'm sorry. I did not see any answers.
OK, thank you. Planning Commission.
This is Ron Bednar, City Planning. First name Ron, R -O -N. Last name Bednar, B -E -D -E -N -A -L.
Do you swear or affirm, tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Thank you, sir.
As property is indicated, for residential use on the City Plan, given the physical circumstances of the site and evidence of its existing condition, we recommend the request for variance be granted.
Thank you. MI 2022 -007 -297 -5222, West Columbia Avenue, I vote yes.
Thomas Holliman, my vote is yes.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes.
Thank you. You have your votes, ma 'am.
Thank you so much. I appreciate it. Now, what do I do now?
You'll hear from us. You'll get a letter.
Oh, okay.
Okay, thank you.
You're welcome.
Number three, MI 2022 -003 -722 -3500 Ainsley Street.
Justin Crick is the attorney.
There's a letter of opposition from the RCO and three letters of opposition from the community.
Mr. Chair, this is Hillary.
I just want to update that we have four letters of opposition from community members, including three from the 3 ,500 block of Ainsley Street.
Thank you very much.
good afternoon could you state your name and spell for the court reporter please
yes justin crick j -u -s -t -i -n -k -r -i -k right do you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole
truth and nothing but the truth i do but you identify your client a relationship to this
property yes my client is the gentleman on the line is Anthony Massiri he is a member of Ainsley
LLC the owner of the property thank you and our vice chair has just a few questions
good afternoon counsel do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its
accuracy I do have you emailed in all the required documents and exhibits that are needed to proceed
with this case five days in advance of this hearing yes thank you please proceed to share your screen
thank you
one moment
here we go
Thank you. Members of the board, we're here today on an application by the owner of 3500
Ainsley Street in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. They are looking for the legalization of this
property into a five -unit residential dwelling, currently has five units. And at this point,
the refusals that were received related to parking in order to meet this
requirement because of the location of the property next to an RSA 3 district
the required parking space number was five and we do not have any proposed
additionally the five -unit household dwelling is prohibited in the CMX 1
district again because we are adjacent to an RSA 5 zoning district for
geographical purposes and just to give an idea, this is the property we're talking about.
There is a lot of character to this property, albeit its current condition which is being
worked on.
But some of the notable things about the property is, number one, it's overall size.
It has a significant amount of square footage that my client can testify to that is, in
this case, best used for residential purposes.
um long ago the the first floor was converted from commercial use i don't believe my clients
Long ago, the first floor was converted from commercial use.
I don't believe my
aware of what was there before but um it is again we believe best situated for that residential use
and another unique characteristic of the property is this back section here which
again is it is its own unit in and of itself and and as the floor plans will show kind of lends
itself to the density of the property to allow for a little bit more density of the property
We are situated at the corner of Ainsley and Conrad Street.
As you can see, there's quite a bit from these maps, quite a bit of coverage of the structure,
but there is rear yard space that we use and we'll be putting a trash enclosure in.
The CMX1 designation next to RSA3 and some additional photos from the side angle of the
property.
The applicant has submitted to the neighborhood organization a restoration plan that is already
underway. It is not complete by any means, but underway. That includes new windows and some
painting of the facade and correction of bricks in certain spots. The replacement of these smaller
windows with nicer windows in these recently, you know, previously filled in or bricked in
window wells and again so to deal with the trash issue the intent is to put an
enclosure either along the sidewalk where the steps come out onto the
sidewalk or in the backyard which I will show pictures of momentarily so this is
the backyard accessible by one of the rear units and we believe that if
necessary the trash enclosure can go in the rear part of this section it is a
little elevated from the street level let me zoom out a little bit and now I
have some photographs of the interior space so there are occupants in many of
the properties many of the units currently and as you can see there's
ample space in a lot of these units that again lends itself to a layout that would provide
for four unit I'm sorry five unit density without overcrowding the premises.
So existing first floor shows two units, a fairly sized two bedroom unit in the first
in the front and two bedroom unit in the rear.
second floor has one bedroom units one in the front one in the rear and then the third floor
is a single unit on its own because the fifth unit I'm sorry the the additional unit comes
into play in the in the rear I'm sorry in the rear here so yes two on the first floor two in
the second floor sorry about that and one on the third floor again you can see that there's ample
space in these units that they're not too small. They're not all single unit or studio apartments.
This is the restoration plan that the property owner has engaged its self -contained management
company to initiate. And again, a lot of information has been conducted on the interior
of the property. Dependent upon the nature of the zoning that is granted, the level of interior
work may be changing or may not be as robust, but the exterior and the look and the feel in the
neighborhood, including lighting and safety, are going to be addressed and a part of that plan.
The applicant also is just trying to explain that it is not an absentee landlord. This owner
has several projects in the neighborhood and has demonstrated that and provided a couple of
different similar buildings in their portfolio that we believe were evident
of the work that that is performed we did share this with the RCO and hope
that you know that they would see some of the work that is done the this is a
copy of the deed showing ownership the first page we have a tax clearance
certificate that is still valid and pictures of the posting on the property
property, and one of the concerns from the neighborhood was that the neighbors know how
to get in touch with or people know how to get in touch with who manages the property
and so that a placard was placed on the property wall so that they can communicate freely and
let us know if there's anything that needs to be addressed.
Notice was sent to the neighborhood of the meeting and proof of mailing is attached.
notice was sent to the neighborhood of the meeting and proof of mailing is attached.
So essentially the owner seeks to legalize the unit, the property for five units under the basis that given its size and the nature of what is happening in the community,
we don't believe that it is the highest and best use to add a commercial use and that the space is best situated for residential and that the compliance with the literal compliance with the zoning code would create a hard job.
How long has your client owned the property?
Well, so Damon Massiri, who sold the property to Ainsley, is involved with that company.
So it has been for over 10 or so years.
Thank you.
Thank you.
I did see the notice from the neighborhood.
I understand their concerns.
But again, we do believe that we have been working with them in good faith and demonstrated that we are committed to addressing their concerns.
All right. Do you want to have your testimony adopted by your client?
Yes, please. Mr. Messiri, if you are on, please raise your hand.
He's been allowed to speak.
Sir, could you state your name and spell, please, for the court reporter?
Anthony Massiri, A -N -T -H -O -N -Y -M -A -S -C -I -E -R -I.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Proceed, counsel.
Thank you.
Mr. Massiri, have you had an opportunity to hear my statements to the board today?
Yes, I have.
And were those statements true and correct to the best of your knowledge?
And would you adopt those statements as if they were your own testimony today?
Thank you. No further questions.
Before we go any further, what was the vote at the RCO?
The RCO did oppose this.
It was a pretty much overwhelming opposition.
However, there was a proviso that to the extent that – I wouldn't call it a proviso – but to the extent that the committee itself was agreeable to a four -unit with a commercial unit,
the remaining population of the neighborhood was not opposed to the legalization or additional
units. So it was opposed. Questions from the board? No, Chair. No, Mr.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
sir i have a hand raised by mr by mr hillary langer i have not okay
sure sir could you state your name please and spell for the court reporter
hi my name is hillary langer h -i -l -a -r -y l -a -n -g -e -r i am chair of the east falls community
Council Zoning Committee. Right. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth,
nothing but the truth? I do. Proceed, Mr. Langer. Yes, we've met twice with this group, the owner
and Justin. The overwhelming census over two meetings was to oppose this. The primary reasons
are really the continued congestion,
the possibility of congestion
of five units in one building.
In the last meeting,
they did explain
there are five to seven cars
at any one time
that may be parked on the street
from the residents of these units.
Unfortunately,
over the term of the ownership here,
I believe it's 15 years or more,
um there's a kind of a historical lack of maintenance on the property so the neighborhood
is wary about even after a renovation is the property going to remain in a maintained
condition so there are concerns there if you look at the back of my letter of opposition
you'll see a lot of pictures there that relate to the existing conditions of the property
This has been ongoing for more than a decade.
So you've got to understand that there's
a lack of trust right now between the neighborhood
and its owner.
In looking at the proposal, it would seem reasonable
that the lower level is maintained as a commercial space.
The property is located on the corner of Conrad and Ainslie.
and Conrad Street has a number of destination storefronts that are thriving and operating.
storefronts that are thriving and operating and provide destinations to the neighborhood.
There's probably 9, 10 to 12 operating storefronts, and Conrad Street does not seem to have any
trouble leasing those commercial spaces.
It would seem reasonable to us that four units over the two remaining floors would seem a
reasonable um number of units um the neighbors would like even less they would prefer three
um but i would also like to note that um we had no facade review we don't actually know what the
intent is um with the windows uh we don't know if there's still going to be pokey little windows
that are going to be shoved into those old storefront openings.
We just don't know.
And I apologize, I was not aware of that scope.
Maybe I missed it in an email, that scope of work,
but I had not previously seen that.
And I would also like to note that
um justin mr crick related certain actions that have been taken by the owner absolutely
um contact number was posted on the building however the trash was never moved the backyard
was cut once and those weeds are now three or four feet high once again um so you know it can't
be a one -time little dab. Maintenance has got to be an ongoing weekly issue, especially with five
units. So the bottom line is, as an RCO, we would approve a business on the lower level, reflecting
the nature of Conrad Street now, and that four units above would be more than enough
units squeezed into the remaining two floors.
Thank you, Mr. Langer. Mr. Crick, I'll give you a chance to respond. I just want to see if there's
anyone else in the virtual audience. Okay. Yes, thank you. Okay. Is there anyone else in the
virtual audience? No, sir, I do not see anyone else.
And Hillary, we have a total of four letters, three of which from that locate that block.
Sorry, Mr. Chair. Yes, Mr. Chair, that is correct.
Okay. And they're all in opposition?
They are.
Okay. Mr. Gregg, do you want to respond?
Yeah, I'll just reiterate that while we did appreciate the idea or the notion of the commercial,
The owner did not feel that it was the best use and that some of the parking concerns might even be exaggerated, not overnight necessarily, but just during the day and traffic flow.
And as far as upkeep goes, there's very little that you can say other than the proofs in the pudding kind of thing.
I know that this this owner as being a member of the community and having ownership for a long time and intending to do so longer would would not be opposed to any sort of a temporary proviso for for any approval for multiple units that would be revisited if the work was not up to standard.
Thank you. Planning Commission.
This is Ron Bednar, City Planning.
the property is indicated as commercial mixed use on a city plan or adopted district plan
recommends no change existing zoning at this location it's near a existing commercial corridor
nearby predominantly single -family residential homes the appellant's hardship is not supported
with evidence of unique physical circumstances or condition of the property that would prevent
it from being used in conformity with the code but we recommend the request for variance not be
Brandon. What I want to do, Mr. Crick, is sit and talk to my our board about where we stand with
this. We will we will have this back in two weeks. We're off next week. The final week,
we'll do it on a Wednesday and we'll vote at 2 p .m. Very good. Thank you very much.
All right. Thank you. All right. Number four. MI 2022 007 638 1163 South Broad Street. Brandon Saffron is the attorney. South Broad Street Neighbor Association has a letter of non -opposition.
South Broad Street Neighbor Association has a letter of non -opposition.
Coming back in as a panelist, sir.
Saverin, how are you, sir?
I'm well.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
State your name and spell, please, for the court reporter.
Brandon Saverin, B -R -A -N -D -O -N, S as in Sam, A, V as in Victor, R -A -N as in Nancy.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Could you identify your client and the relationship to the property?
My client is Philadelphia Suburban Development Corporation.
They are the owner of the property.
Our vice chair has a few questions.
Good afternoon, counsel.
Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to his accuracy?
Yes, vice chair.
Okay. Have you emailed in all the required documents and exhibits that are needed to
proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing? Yes, I did.
Thank you. Please proceed and share your screen. Okay. Thank you.
okay good afternoon members of the board I am here on a referral for a special exception so
this is an application for a special exception not for a variance for group practitioner use
on the third floor of an existing building at 1163 South Broad Street. That is the address as
OPA and the city have it. I think there are some other addresses used for mailing purposes,
but that's irrelevant for purposes of this discussion. And I'll show you the building
in one moment. So what we are applying to do is take the third floor of this building,
which I believe is currently vacant. And this is an office building. There's no residential use in
here. And bring in a new tenant called Helping Hands Children's Services, which is basically a
clinic that provides treatment and support services for autistic children. So this is something that
would be very beneficial to the community. Because this use does not require a variance,
the legal standard for a special exception is easier. And the question before you for the case
law is essentially, is our proposed use of this part of this office building more negatively
impactful on the public than what would be expected from a typical group practitioner
use, which is to say, are we more negative than a typical doctor's office practice,
dental practice, et cetera, with multiple practitioners?
Because that's what group practitioner use is under the code.
So just to get you oriented as to where we are here, this is our parcel.
It is located on the northeast corner of Federal and Broad Streets in the heart of South Philadelphia, right on top of a Broad Street Line subway stop.
I will go down to the next page and show you an aerial image right there.
So this is a large office building that consists of an older building that was sort of combined with, I believe, some newer additions over the years.
So this is the older piece of the complex, and we are talking about the third floor within this piece.
This is on the same property legally, this newer piece.
And that's what I meant by sort of the newer addition. But there's no construction that is proposed before you today. This is purely to enable a new tenant to use part of the existing space, no addition, just a tenant fit out and then the tenant would move in.
So we have a letter of non -opposition from the coordinating RCO. That's the South Broad Street Neighborhood Association. And you can see in their vote count here that all of the attendees decided to vote in non -opposition.
We ended up also entering into a, I guess you would call it a community benefits agreement, and I'll show you what that looks like in a moment.
This is a detail letter that accompanied the RCO's vote report.
This is a detail letter that accompanied the RCO's vote report.
And by the way, I'm not naming these exhibits, but they're all in our submitted exhibit binder and numbered with a table of contents, if you have to reference it after today for any reason.
So this is that letter that accompanied the RCO's vote tally.
It says, I'll just read a sentence or two, quote,
quote, SBSNA felt this was a comfortable fit for this building. SBSNA had some non -zoning issues
where the parties formulated a community benefits agreement that has been signed by SBSNA,
I believe it means, and the building owner and the third floor tenant, end quote.
So with that being said, here is that agreement.
And as they said, these are not really zoning issues, but I'll share them with you just to demonstrate that my client, as the building owner, who's been there a while and will continue to be, has nothing but the intent to reassure and cooperate with the community.
So really, the core issues in this letter, and I'm not going to read them, I'll just summarize them.
are that the use of the practice is specifically for therapy for children with autism,
that the staffing relative to the number of clients' children there at any one time will be appropriate.
And it says typically that would be about 20 clients and 24 staff members,
so more than a one -to -one ratio in favor of staff.
It speaks about hours of operation here at point three, with weekends being by appointment only, the main operation happening during the week.
And then four and five are about things that we promised not to do in this space.
So we're not operating a safe injection site and we're not operating a drug or alcohol addiction clinic.
And clearly, I can assure you, those things are not remotely related to what this tenant does as part of its business in their other existing facilities elsewhere.
Beyond that, and I won't go through them in detail, but we did have floor plans made of that third floor space.
and I just wanted to speak for one moment about the history of the building and the requirements
for a special exception. So my firm, Rachel and I submitted a memorandum of law to the board that
goes through the special exception standards. Real quickly, those standards are before you
on the screen numbered little a to little g. And here's why I believe we meet these standards.
We're not causing congestion in public streets or on transportation systems because we're on
Broad Street. This is an arterial roadway with great on -street parking and a subway station
right below us. We're not causing overcrowding to the land because we're using an existing
building without physically expanding it. And similarly, we're not impairing an adequate supply
of light or air to our neighbors or impairing our neighbors' use of their buildings because, again,
we're avoiding any additions to this building. We're not burdening water, sewer, school,
or park facilities, any public facilities, because this has been an office building in
operation for many years. And what we're putting in there in terms of this clinic is no more
intensive than other uses have been on those systems. So this is probably net neutral in
comparison to how this property has been used in the past in terms of impact on public systems.
That's also why I would say we're not negatively affecting the public health or safety.
And finally, in terms of consistency with the Planning Commission's comprehensive plan, Mr. Bednar or the Planning Commission's representative will testify if there's been any change.
But in the most recent public district plan, which is basically what what I as an attorney can access, this property was proposed to be up zoned to CMX three or four.
If that had occurred, which it is not, but it's what the Planning Commission recommended at the time, this would not require a special exception.
This would not require a special exception. I believe it would have been a by right use, but it basically goes to show you that I believe you'll hear that the Planning Commission found that, you know, a medical use or a clinic is appropriate for this location.
I believe it was.
We certainly believe so, at least based on that most recent published comprehensive plan for this district.
Beyond that, and these will be my final exhibits, I just wanted to give you a sense using some official record here of what's been in the building in the past.
So this is a permit issued 12 years ago, a zoning permit that allowed an adult daycare in the first floor of the building.
And here is a permit from 11 years ago that allowed a social service agency to locate on the second floor of the building.
So just to say that, you know, this is this is kind of what this building is.
It provides, I would say, public facing commercial services.
And this application just continues on that path forward.
I am going to stop sharing my screen and I have John Peruto from the property owning company to adopt my testimony.
And he and I are happy to take questions.
Thank you. Mr. Peruto, could you state your name and spell it, please, for the court reporter?
It's been enough to speak.
Thank you. State your name and spell for the court reporter.
John Peruto, J -O -H -N -P -E -R -U -T -O.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Proceed, counsel.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
John, were you able to hear the full extent of my testimony in your case this afternoon?
Yes, I was.
Was it true and accurate to the best of your knowledge, information, and belief?
Yes, it was.
Would you therefore adopt it as if it had been your own testimony?
Yes, I would.
Okay, thank you.
Questions from the board?
No, Chair.
No, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
Mr. Chair, this is Hillary.
I just had a quick question for Mr. Saverin.
On the refusal, it notes there was a three -year temporary variance for the same use in 2017.
Was that a different tenet or is that the current tenet?
That was not the current tenant. I don't know if John is still on, but my understanding is this tenant is new to this space and it intends to stay longer than that. So we would ask for a non -temporary special exception.
Understood. Thank you.
Thank you.
Questions from the virtual audience?
um yes mr chair i have mr peter zutter with his hand raised i have allowed him to speak
sure uh yes hello my name is peter uh zutter z -u -t -t -e -r mr zutter could you spell your
name for the court reporter please sure it's peter p -e -t -e -r zutter z -u -t -t -e -r right do you
swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth i do proceed um i'm president
of the South Broad Street Neighborhood Association and just we like to sit on
these hearings. We very much appreciate the building
owner's agreement with some of the restrictions
here. We're a little sensitive about some of these issues right now
and we think this is a good fit for the building and
agree with everything that was presented. So it has our support.
Thank you, Mr. Zutter. Thank you for taking the time to call in. Is there anyone else in the
virtual audience. I see no further hands Mr. Chair. Planning Commission. This is Ron Bednar
City Planning. Property is indicated for commercial and the city plan. Top of the district plan
recommends no changes to existing zoning at this location. Proposed use should have no more of a
negative impact than would be expected given its commercial location. Therefore we recommend the
granting of the special exception. Thank you. MI 2022 007 -638 -1163 South Broad Street. I vote yes.
Tom Solomon, my first guest.
Ishmael Shaheem, my vote is yes.
Ishmael Shaheem, my vote is yes.
Thank you.
Thank you, counsel, and please stay on.
All right.
MI number five, MI 2022 -007 -288 -4223 Palton Avenue.
Mr. Saverin, it's the attorney.
Just for the record, mention your name.
Right?
I'm Brandon Saverin of Pritzker Law Group, and I represent 4200 Powelton, LLC, who is the property owner.
Our vice chair has just a few questions.
Good afternoon, Mr. Saverin.
Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Yes, I do.
Have you emailed in all the required documents and exhibits that are needed to proceed with this case?
five days in advance of this hearing? Yes. Thank you. Please proceed. Mr. Chavrin, you have an RCO letter?
Yes, we have a RCO letter of support. And I also wanted to mention that we're asking for
proviso plans to be stamped. I believe they are one page, although I can confirm that. Yes,
what one page of proviso plans okay okay thank you let's see here
okay good afternoon again members of the board so the application before you now is a appeal for a
variance for 42, 23, and 25 Powelton Avenue. As is typically the case, L &I used one address
when drafting the notice of refusal, but you'll see in the text of the scope on the refusal
that it concerns the consolidation of two existing parcels into one parcel,
and then the erection of a semi -detached structure for use as three dwelling units
with three off -street accessory parking spaces in the building's rear.
So this is currently two vacant lots.
And what I'm going to show you in one moment and what demonstrates the core of the hardship in this case
is that with the exception of one building our entire side of our block
is vacant and has been since 1996 in fact why don't I pull that up right now
so these are from Atlas so these are official aerial photographs provided by the city at
exhibit 13 of our packet. And the 96 photo is a little blurry, but it's at the top of my screen
right now. And what you will see is that on our side of this block, there's been no further
development over that two and a half decades. I think we have some sort of institutional building
that's sort of on the corner, but really faces 42nd Street. And then, as I mentioned, there's
one building in the middle of the block, which happens to be our neighbor, and just a bunch of
vacant land. So, you know, this demonstrates, we believe, that single -family ground -up construction
has not been viable in this location over this entire span of years. And what we're proposing,
essentially, we believe, is the minimum necessary relief to solve that problem. It's to take two
lots, combine them, so you'll have a lot that is over 30 feet wide, and we're asking you for only
an additional half a unit extra, in the sense that if we develop these two lots separately, we'd
be permitted under the RSA 5 zoning to develop one home per lot for a total of two units.
on our property, but we're asking for three units. So it's really only half of an extra unit
per lot. And that we believe will break the ice, so to speak.
And that, we believe, will break the ice, so to speak, and allow my client to obtain financing to construct a project here from the ground up.
The consolidation will also help with the ability to fit parking into it.
And I'll go through how the parking is designed and how that unavoidably triggered some refusals in one moment.
I want to show you the zoning map just to demonstrate that while our largely vacant side of the block is zoned RSA5 until you get over here to a Drexel -owned sports complex, the other three of the four corners at 42nd and Powleton are zoned RM1.
And here's why that's important. For starters, it means that by my count, on the other side of the street from us, which is developed on like our side of the block, 10 of the 22 buildings are used for duplex or multifamily use.
and here's a list that I put in my memo of law on your screen. So that means that our block is
about half used for more than one dwelling unit per property. And these are, this is not by visual
observation. This is per registered zoning permits. I have a zoning permit reflecting
these units in the packet I've submitted to you for each of these buildings. So this is really
thoroughly a block that has a lot of multi -unit buildings. And again, we're doing three units on
two lots. So we are less dense in terms of unit density than these other properties.
We also are proposing off -street parking at the request of the community,
which most of these other properties don't have.
um now let me go into um those refusals just to jump back up to the notice of refusal so
i'm going to start from the bottom here excuse me here we go okay so the at the bottom of the
notice of refusal the first refusal is for the fact that we're proposing three dwelling units
on this combined property, whereas only one per lot is allowed. The next one up is for the sheer
fact that we're proposing parking. There's no rear or side street or alley that services our
property that's large enough for vehicles. So because of that, it's impossible under the zoning
code for RSA 5 to have off -street parking. We want to have parking. So that's as, you know,
know, a clean explanation for the second refusal from the bottom. The third one from the bottom
is for where we're placing that parking. We're going to have a 29 foot deep rear yard. So there's
a lot of open space that we're preserving in the back of our building. But we're going to use,
as I'll show you on the plan, a good portion of it so that we can get three parking spaces back
there. The code mandates that the final nine feet of our 29 -foot rear yard be unpaved. And if we
were to do that, we would only get two parking spaces. So given the size of the yard and the
need we feel to have one space per unit, we needed to take up a little bit more of that rear yard
And the code allows to get three parking spaces in there.
And then finally, the top refusal is for the fact that our front porch will be a little closer to the lot line than that belonging to the building next to us.
So we're going to be two feet closer, but we're still, our front porch and our bay windows above are going to be set five feet off the front property line, which, as you can see in this rendering, ooh, that is way too zoomed in, I apologize, hold on, there we go.
um this is still going to leave a really nice amount of space so we're going to have an ample
sized front porch which is sort of a modern take on our neighbor and we're gonna have space for
something like planters to sit in front of it and this is all um you know um uh without uh
impacting the sidewalk right of way for travel.
impacting the sidewalk right of way for travel.
I think that I'll show you the zoning plan real fast.
Basically, if we were to push the building back another two feet as the code would command,
it would either cause the units to be smaller or it would take away from this space right here.
And what this space allows us to do is make sure that when you go out the back door of the building,
you're not walking into a parking space I believe there's like three or three and a half feet of
space here where you can open the rear door and be assured that a car is not going to come and
run you over so so you know we wanted to preserve this space in the back and and that sort of made
it difficult to push the building back uh further um see what else oh yeah and let me uh quickly
show the floor plans um this is uh the tentative floor plans that we had marked up and because of
the uh uh the double lot width and because of the uh you know dimensional refusals that we did
generate to sort of make everything fit we were able to have really nice sized units so the second
and third floor are each their own units um and the smallest of them the third floor is still 852
square feet so these are going to be you know really nice living space very wide um you know
abnormally wide for a philadelphia low home um and then i'll go into the rco letter uh we have
a letter of support here from the west powell and saunders park rco which was the coordinating rco
it reflects an overwhelming vote in support and you can see that on the table they provided
Um, there's a explanation letter that, um, basically ends up referencing the same issues
that went into the CBA that we entered with them.
And, and what that CBA speaks to, um, are, are not, I believe issues that are enforceable
by proviso, but are things that my client is gonna, uh, per his signature comply with.
So those are to take best faith efforts to sell these, um, units as condos, because that's
what the RCO preferred. It wanted sale units rather than rental units. Also to contribute
to a fund that the RCO has at a reasonable $250 a year going forward beyond an initial payment
for neighborhood cleanup and to preserve some egress alleys that are in the rear and the side
of the building um that that's sort of a summary there's some additional issues but i don't want
to take your time reading through this whole letter um i think that uh that's that pretty
much accounts for my presentation um i do have the architect here um logan drive right then i
can i ask the question and i'm not saying that was this was this uh proposal brought 2021 to
zoning board and was turned down um you know let me see if that's indicated on the refusal
and if not what i'd have to do is look it up but it might be um
yes and i think that i think mr chairman what this doesn't answer though is whether that
pertained only to this um half of this space or what or all of it and when i bring my client
all right okay and you you were not your firm wasn't the attorney then um i at least was not
and i don't believe our firm was that's right thank you yeah
um my my client's name is uh saki pyramid atopolis if he's available
Mr. Chair, I see who we're looking for right now.
I've allowed the gentleman to speak.
Hi, sir.
Could you state your name and spell it, please, for the court reporter?
How are you doing, Aaron?
My name is Saki Karamitopoulos, S -A -K -I -K -A -R -A -M -I -T -O -P -O -U -L -O -S.
Right.
Do you swear a firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Proceed, counsel.
Saki, before I go into the usual questions, real quickly, did you personally, through your LLC, bring at least part of this property through the variance process in 2021?
Yes, I did.
i had a i was represented by somebody else and what we proposed was two triplexes on the lots
Okay. So is it correct then that when that refusal that you have now says that you presented an application for 42 -23 Powleton, that you were trying to put three units in a property that is half as wide as what you're proposing now? Is that right?
okay so is it correct then that when that
That's correct. Yeah.
Okay. Other than that, were you able to hear my testimony in your case this afternoon?
I did, yes.
And was it true and accurate to the best of your knowledge, information, and belief?
Yes, it was.
And would you therefore adopt that testimony as if it were your own?
Absolutely.
Okay, thank you.
And, Mr. Chair, if you have any questions about that distinction.
Questions from the board?
No, Mr. Chairman.
No, Chair.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
Mr. Chair, I have Pamela Andrews with the hand raised. I have allowed them to speak at this time.
Sure. Could you please state your name and spell for the court reporter?
Hello?
Andrews, please unmute if you wish to speak.
Wait to be sworn at.
Hi. Can you hear me now?
I can. Could you state your name, please, and spell for the court reporter?
Pamela Andrews, P -A -M -E -L -A, Andrews, A -N -D -R -E -W -S.
I am the chair of West Palatine Saunders Park RCO.
Hold on one minute.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Roshid.
I'm just here to make a quick testimony.
We did support this project this time in 2022 when it came before us.
We did not support the project because of density and we wanted something smaller in size.
We're also an RCO that is trying to really increase homeownership in our area.
So we were pleased with this second revision, which allows the units to be sold as condominiums.
Thank you so much.
Thank you for calling in and taking the time. Is there anyone else in the virtual audience?
Yes, sir. Jahad Ali.
Mr. Ali, could you state your name, please, and spell for the court reporter?
Sure, Mr. Chairman. My name is Jahad Ali, J -I -H -A -D -A -L -I.
Right. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yeah, I affirm.
Proceed.
Mr. Chairman, you know, I'm a, my organization is a stakeholder.
I'm with the Enterprise Center, which is at 4248 Market Street.
And I'm aware, I didn't hear the council talk about that, but is that currently being used as a basketball park, a basketball court?
Not to my knowledge, but I would welcome my client to answer the question.
Well, let me just state for the record what I want to tell the chairman about.
So, Mr. Chairman, that is right next to PHA's housing site that was home to 350 families,
which is probably close to 100 young men and women that frequently play on that basketball court.
But because right now the housing authority is undergoing a renovation, that family is not there.
I would just like to know, was it resident counsel from West Park where they made aware of this decision?
So if if the Mr. Chairman, as you may know, the city actually gives the applicant the list of.
Yeah, I can I can look quickly to see if West Park is is on the list.
We also notified all affected RCOs, not just the coordinating RCOs.
So if West Park has an RCO or is in communication with any of those RCOs, they would have been notified that way.
I think the thing to stress.
West Park doesn't have an RCO.
They're a council, resident council.
And then also, if the councilwoman is signed off on it, well, that would end my question because she would be aware of that.
Has the councilwoman signed off on that?
So we sent the CBA and the letter of support to the councilwoman's office. The councilwoman has not responded positively or negatively.
I would love to see this case voted today, but given the support of the coordinating RCO and the vote reflected in it and the CBA, I'm very confident that the councilwoman would not oppose this project, particularly given that my client basically gave a second lot to make it less dense versus what he originally proposed.
to make it less dense versus what he originally proposed so I am not attempting to hide this from
the councilwoman I sent everything over to Andrew Goodman her zoning contact just you know I didn't
know whether she'd offer a letter or or send Mr. Goodman to this hearing apparently that didn't
happen but well Mr. Chairman just as he said if he's not if he's not trying to hide it from her
if he could just hold it and let her weigh in on it but also because of the resident park the
resident council there at west park because young people need places to play and they active they
still they use that park is under use now i come by there every day at the end of the day three
o 'clock it's in use drexel students use it the community uses it so in light of that at least
hold it for the councilwoman in west park to weigh in on it and that i'm just doing my duty as a
concerned citizen as a stakeholder mr chairman it's all up to you thank you sir yeah thank you
I appreciate your call. Is there anyone else in the virtual audience?
Yes, sir. Logan Dry has his hands raised. I have allowed him to speak at this time.
Okay. Sir, state your name and spell, please, for the court reporter.
Sure. Logan Dry, L -O -G -A -N -D -R -Y, KCA Design Associates.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Proceed, sir.
Just wanted to point out for a point of clarification here.
you know there are basketball courts adjacent to this property but this is not at all affecting
them this is not any sort of closure of basketball courts this is the grassy lot adjacent to those
recreational courts so there's no sort of impact or any sort of you know demolition or encroachment
on those existing basketball courts those all you know remain the same this is the the two grassy
lots adjacent to those courts. Thank you. Thank you. Is there anyone else in the virtual audience?
Yes, Kara Rennert with her hand raised. I will now do the speak.
Could you state your name, please, and spell for the court reporter?
Yes, Kara Rennert, K -A -R -A -R -E -N -N -E -R -T.
That's right. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
my testimony pertains to two things um the first thing is the driveway flare and apron
the plan that we looked at a few minutes ago for 423 powleton shows an encroachment of two feet
into the right -of -way of 4221 powleton which is my house via that driveway flare and apron
both streets and ellen i reviewed the plans and confirmed to me via email that it does not follow
code and is not permitted um streets stated that in order to approve that variance uh permission
is quite required by the owner of 4221 paladin to approve the encroachment of the driveway flare
and apron uh streets stated that without that permission the driveway and flares need to be
redesigned to show no impact to the adjacent property owner's sidewalk or property frontage
so I'm the owner of that property and I do not give my permission for any encroachment whatsoever
to my property frontage so Mr. Chairman if I could quickly reply um we obviously I mean I'm
a real estate attorney rule number one we do not build encroaching features into other people's
property it's it shows it shows directly Ms. Renner let him let him finish and I'll give you
chance. Go ahead. To the extent, and I would, Mr. Dry, by the way, who you heard from a moment ago
is our project architect, to the extent that his drawing accidentally shows part of the driveway
apron, which by the way, is just a depression in the sidewalk on the adjacent property. When we go
through the full streets review, which we haven't yet, you go through a zoning level streets review,
But after we get our variance, we must go through a full streets review before getting a building permit.
Streets will not approve anything that encroaches on a neighboring property, and we will make revisions accordingly.
I can assure you that we will not obtain a building permit for or do any building outside of our property lines.
That is a promise, and that should not impact your ability to grant zoning variance.
Renter, do you hear the comment?
Ms. Renter? Unmute, please. Yes, sorry. I did, yes. Okay. And the city surveyor has come out and
marked the points of the property so we know where that line is because it does go over my gas line.
Um, because it does go over my gas line, um, other sort of just to, uh, reply to, uh, Brandon's
Okay. Other
comments in the beginning about sort of the desolation of the area. I just would say that
that's not true. We have a, an active basketball court next door and the lots that he's referring
to were owned by the Wilkerson family prior to selling them to Ludwig, which Saki purchased
them from. So the Wilkerson family used that lot, both those lots. There's pictures on Google to
show it. It was part of that whole family unit. And the church on the corner is the Presbyterian
Church, which is a historical black church. So it's not an area that's been unable to be developed.
It was actively lived in and used until those lots were separated and sold. Okay. Thank you
for your input and calling in.
Is there anyone else in the virtual audience?
No further answer, Mr. Chair.
Mr. Chairman, Mr. Chairman.
Yes, sir.
Excuse me, Mr. Chairman.
Do the architect have a site plan that he can put up?
Can you show on the screen the site plan?
Yes, Mr. Holloman.
One moment, I'll get it up on the screen
and if we could allow Logan Dry to speak again.
let's see so the zoning plan is um logan i have you tell me what would help you i have
your zoning plan and the uh survey as well i'm figuring the zoning plan is what you need but
let us know yeah i mean if you want to zoom in so mr holland can see and again this was
reviewed by streets department and approved as part of the prerequisite for the zoning under
Streets Department Review SR 2022 -016 -011. So if anything's changed since then, as far as the
Streets Department's rules or approval standings, then, you know, I wouldn't know about that at this
point, but this is what we submitted. Streets Department, and they reviewed it and approved
it prior to the L &I examiner completing their review and issuing the refusal.
all. And Logan, can you reaffirm that this is going to go through an even more thorough second
review before a building permit is obtained? Is that right? Yeah, I mean, they'll have to do a
building prerequisite review as well. So if the streets department at that time, you know, provides
an alternate curb depression that, you know, they feel is a better solution to any sort of conflicts
there might be with perhaps stuff that's in the sidewalk, then that would be something to lend
You know, find. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I like to recommend this. Thomas, I am going to do that. Thank you.
Anyone else in the virtual audience?
No one else, Mr. Chair.
um planning commission it's uh ron bednar city planning property is indicated for residential
and the city plan or adopted district plan recommends no change the existing residential
zoning at this location the applicant's hardship is not supported with evidence of unique
physical circumstances or condition of the property that would prevent it from being
used and conforming with the code therefore we recommend request for vans not be granted
thank you mr chairman um brief response to that is that okay yeah go ahead okay um the last thing
i just want to point out because we have the site plan on the screen i i would ask the board um to
note the difference um the the degree of width of um the property that we are proposing and again
that this really was to enable a project that can fit parking in the rear which was a desire
of the community. And if you need any clarification on that setback issue, this site plan, which you
have in your packet, it sort of shows you that we really are lining up fairly closely with the way
the neighbor's house is arranged on the property. I believe we have a hardship because this is the
the most modest thing we could do beyond building single family homes and the single family homes
right now just don't pencil out. That's it. All right. Mr. Saver, we're going to hold this vote
for two weeks. Okay. We'll vote at two o 'clock. But in the meantime, I would appreciate if you
could notify the council person's office, Mr. Goodman. Yes. To see if they have a response to
that yes yes and and i assure you i already have hold up hold up hold up sure and so is
Yes. And I assure you, I already have. Hold up, hold up, hold up.
And so as soon as you have that, I would appreciate you could send that to our council.
OK. And one way or the other, if you're not going to have a letter, then let her know that council person is not going to take a position.
OK. And I'm going to close the case, except for the meeting at the executive session that we have.
OK. OK. Thank you. All right. All right. Thank you. Thank you.
Number nine, MI -2022 -007 -640 -175 West Oxford.
Catherine Mismer is the attorney.
Support from the RCO.
Letter of non -opposition from Council Member Lozada.
good afternoon counsel could you state your name please and spell for the court reporter
yes katherine k -a -t -h -e -r -i -n -e missomer m as in mary i s as in sam s as in sam i m as in mary
er 1835 market street suite 1400 19103 you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth and
nothing but the truth i do um could you identify your client the relationship to this property
Yes, I am here on behalf of Northern Star Developments, LLC, owner of the property.
Okay, our vice chair has just a few questions.
Paige?
Yes, good afternoon, counsel.
So do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal or stipulate to its accuracy?
Have you emailed in all the required documents and exhibits that are needed to proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing?
Yes, sir, I have.
Thank you. Please proceed.
Thank you. And are you seeing my screen?
We can.
Great. Thank you.
As mentioned, my name is Catherine Missimer.
I'm here on behalf of Northern Star Development, LLC, owner of the property at 175 West Oxford.
We're here today with an application for a partial demolition of a previously proved addition to a warehouse building, the addition of a non -accessory roof deck, I'm sorry, a non -residential roof deck, and the change of use to an educational facility.
With me today is the owner's representative, Kelly Fox, project architect, Jeff Watson, as well as our prospective tenant, representative, Steve Kersman.
As you can see, this project has the support of the Coordinating RCO, South Kensington Community Partners.
This lot fronts on Oxford, Hancock, 2nd, and Turner Streets.
You should be seeing a site plan as soon as it reloads.
And you'll note that this is part of a larger development project.
Some of you may recall this project came before the board a few years prior to the pandemic.
This was a mixed -use development, including a ground -up mixed -use building here, as well as townhomes here.
But the focus of today's discussion is the existing warehouse building that's located here at the corner of 2nd and Turner Streets.
Following the pandemic, the property owner determined that the prior use that was approved as part of the larger development for this existing warehouse building,
which included both ground floor vacant commercial space as well as office space and additional
residential units wasn't as practical um in the post -pandemic world so that's what's bringing us
back today um with respect to just this this particular portion of the prior project again
it was approved for a two -story addition to the existing building the proposal was to do ground
floor commercial, office space in between, and then residential units above.
Property owner committed to preserving the warehouse, but again, following the pandemic,
alternative uses seem to be a better fit.
Today's proposal is the reduction of that previously approved addition.
So rather than the two -story addition that was proposed, you'll see that in yellow here
on the left, what we're currently proposing is what you see on the right.
So rather than the two stories that we previously had approved, we're going just for this smaller edition, the one -story edition.
Everything in blue is the existing warehouse building that you see.
As well as we're going to do a non -residential roof deck here and in the zoning district that does generate a refusal.
and in the zoning district that does generate a refusal. The proposed use is now for an educational
The proposed use is now for...
facility. The prospective tenant would be Little City Montessori. Little City Montessori is an
existing Montessori school in the neighborhood. They've got a location at 5th and Master Streets.
Given their overwhelming success at that location, they have been looking for a second location,
and this project offers great space, residents on site, and it does provide the space that they
would need to grow that program. What you see on the roof, this would be your non -residential
roof deck. These are transparent panels as part of the eight -foot high safety fence. This is where
the children would play. This provides the safety to give them outdoor space to play, and they're
not going to be at risk of traffic or people coming in and out of other portions of the project.
So it really is a nice fit and use of that space. Little City is a neighborhood school. The bulk of
the students do live in the neighborhood, as well as the teachers and staff. This is the exterior of
the warehouse as we finished. Like I said, this is the existing warehouse building. This is your
addition, and this is a close -up of what that outdoor play area would look like for the children.
Some additional renderings. This is the existing warehouse today.
And some interior and posting photos of that existing condition, as well as the neighborhood.
A little bit about Little City Montessori. It's a family -owned and operated building program, learning program. I apologize.
The founding family, the Kurtzman, still run the program to this day. Their children attend the program.
and they are a community -driven school. They do participate in fundraisers for local community
projects and they are active members of the community. This site is still zoned RSA 5,
which is what brings us here today. The non -residential educational use is not a
permitted use in RSA 5, as well as the non -residential roof deck is not permitted in RSA 5.
Again, this is a unique scenario because we do have that larger project on this site.
It does involve multiple uses, and we think we can fill this space with a neighborhood
amenity, frankly, that provides value add to our community from day one as soon as Little
City is able to open the doors.
So we met with South Kensington Community Partners coordinating RCO.
The meeting was well attended, and several participants did speak about their experience
with Little City at its existing location.
You have a letter of support in your packages.
We believe this project will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood, as evidenced by that letter of support, the comments of the neighbors, and the existing surrounding uses.
We will not impair the use or development of the adjacent property.
Again, it's part of a larger planned community here, and it will be a nice amenity for the neighborhood at large.
With that being said, I do have our architect on the line, should you have plan questions, as well as both our owner's rep and representatives from our prospective tenant, Little City, Montessori.
I would just ask Kelly Fox, who's our owner's rep.
Council one. So I saw the letter of support from the RCO, but our records show that Councilmember Lozada is also in support. Do you have a letter from her?
I did not receive a copy. I did know that.
We have a letter of non -opposition from her as well.
Okay. All right. Why don't we have somebody come on and adopt your testimony?
That'd be great. Could Kelly Fox be permitted to speak, please?
Fox has been about to speak.
Hi, could you state your name, please, and spell for the court reporter?
Yes, my name is Kelly Fox. It's K -E -L -L -Y, F as in Frank, O -X.
You swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
Who's he, counsel?
Thank you. Kelly, have you heard my testimony today?
Would you agree that it's true and correct?
And would you adopt it as your own?
Thank you.
Our representatives are available. Should the board have questions?
Sure. Questions from the board?
No, Mr. Chairman.
No, Chair.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
I see no further answer, Mr. Chair.
Planning Commission?
Ryan Bednar City Planning.
Our adopted district planning recommends no change in existing zoning at this location.
the applicant's hardship not supported with evidence of any physical circumstances or condition
of the property would prevent it from being used in conformity with the code. Therefore,
we recommend the request of ranch not be granted. MI 2022 007 640 17
MI -2022 -007 -640 -175, was Oxford Street, I vote yes.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes.
Thank you, counsel.
Thank you, appreciate it.
All right, okay.
Is there anyone in the virtual audience whose 3 p .m. case or 3 .30 p .m. case has not been heard?
Mr. Chair, we have number six that we didn't call. This case is ready to move forward.
Oh, boy. Okay, thank you. Sorry about that. MI 2022 -007 -334 -2832, Narcissus Road.
RCO is in support of this.
yeah the property owner who i see is raising his hand is uh charles mcclendon okay sir could you
state your name and state your name please and spell for the court reporter
he's coming back in as a panel sir okay
hello hi could you state your name please and spell it for the court reporter yes my name is
charles mclinden c -h -a -r -l -e -s -m -c -l -i -n -d -e -n all right do you swear or affirm to tell the
truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth yes okay our vice chair has just a few questions
for you okay sir yes good afternoon sir have you emailed in all the required documents and exhibits
that are needed to proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing yes okay thank
you please proceed and share your screen mr chair would you like me to read the refusal into the
record there's money but please there's a green button at the bottom of your screen it says share
screen this application this application is to remove and rebuild an existing front porch and
carport and to legalize the portion of the porch as a part of an existing single -family household
living size and location as shown on plans one zoning approval whereas the minimum side yard
width in the rsd3 zoning district is 10 feet but two feet at the porch addition is proposed
okay thank you so Mr. McClendon this is your RCO meeting right yes and you got a they're in
support of where you are right yes that was unanimous support yes okay um why don't you
show us some photos of what you're trying to do and as you show us the photos you can explain to
us what what what what you're trying to do that is the that is the porch right you're saying right
uh how do i that that's the no so so so so so i so so i understand so what happened was you did
this and then people came out and told you how to get a zone yes uh i believe it was l and i that
came out okay because i got the letters in the mail okay thank you so explain what what what
you were doing here uh i was bringing the porch out to make it uh like an eight foot
against from the wall and the the existing carport i i just moved it uh i i made the
roof a little slanted so that i could put a rain guards you know for the rain
all right so you you hold the porsche out and you did the same thing you moved
the carport a little bit over correct all right any else what else did you do
uh that's it that's pretty much it yes okay so you posted your property the way you should have
yeah right um did you mail people did you do a mailing yes yes i did how many people did you
mail to i believe it was 60 okay and that was the list that the city gave you right
yes i have it it's in okay all right okay all right um
i'm not sure which ones which okay that's fine that's fine that's um
Yeah. All right. So, so you, you, you, you did the work.
Somebody wrote a letter or something. L and I came out. Is that right?
Yes. And let me ask you this.
Do you have a picture of what it originally looked like?
That I do not.
That I do not. Okay. Okay.
I believe if you do the Google.
I believe if you do the.
That's fine.
That's fine.
That's fine.
And how much, how far did the porch come out before?
The porch was an, it was just an awning by the front door.
And how far did that come out?
A couple of feet?
Roughly six to eight feet.
Right.
But you moved the whole porch away from the building eight feet, right?
Correct.
And then how far did he move the carport over?
That basically stayed the same, maybe for the sloped area.
That might have came out, like it said, like a foot or two.
All right.
All right.
All right.
Thank you.
Questions from the board?
No, Chair.
Thomas?
No, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you.
Mr. Chairman.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
Mr. Chair, I have Ms. Alice Udovich with her hand raised.
I have a lot of -
Sure, sure.
Good afternoon, Chairman, members of the board.
Good afternoon, Alice.
Could you state your name and spell, please, for the court reporter?
Alice Udovich, A -L -I -C -E.
Udovich is U -D -O -V -I -C -H, on behalf of Councilman Brian O 'Neill.
Right.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Proceed.
The councilman has no objection to the granting of the variance at this location.
Thank you for taking the time to call in.
We appreciate it.
Thank you, Chairman.
Anyone else in the virtual audience?
No further hands, Mr. Chair.
Planning Commission.
This is Ron Bednar, City Planning.
Properties indicated for residential use on the city plan.
the applicant's hardship is self -created it's not supported with evidence of unique physical
circumstances would prevent it from being used and conforming with the code therefore we recommend
the question for that it's not being read it thank you and my 22 -022 -007 -334 -2832 narcissus road
i vote yes thomas holliman my vote is yes
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes.
Sir, you have your votes.
Okay. Thank you.
Oh, thank you.
Is there anyone else in the virtual audience whose case has not been called?
No, sir. I do not see any other hands.
Thanks, everyone.
Emily, thank you very much for helping us today.
We appreciate it.
um we appreciate when we appreciate when your group sends us anybody so thank you very much
we appreciate you and you really did pick up a vote for us today we appreciate it um thanks
everybody enjoy enjoy the holiday enjoy next week and we'll be back in two weeks have a good night