yeah i do not see any hands raised for that matter so mi2025 004 255 5601 hunter street
that case is continued to 3 11 26. hillary will come back at a later date for that other case
that we still have right okay um let's let's do our add ones
number one mi 2024 007 233 2719 east allegheny avenue
i vote yes with proviso per refusal dated 11 26 25. michael johns my vote is a yes with proviso
Cheryl Gaston, my vote is yes with Proviso.
Tanetta Graham, my vote is yes with Proviso.
Diane McAdams, my vote is yes with Proviso.
Diane Wynn, my vote is yes with Proviso.
Number two, MI 2024-004-490-1318 Clearfield Street, T-C-419-484.
I vote yes with Proviso.
Revised plans, four pages, stamped by ZBA, December 3rd, 2025.
Use registration required prior to occupancy for vacant commercial space on the ground floor and maximum 169 dwelling units.
Michael Johnson, my vote is yes with proviso.
Cheryl Gaston, my vote is yes with proviso.
Tanetta Graham, my vote is yes with proviso.
Ryan McAdams, my vote is yes with proviso.
Tywin, my vote is yes with proviso.
Number three, MI-2025-004-185-2250 North 2nd Street, I vote no.
Michael Johns, my vote is no.
Tanetta Graham, my vote is no.
Ryan McAdams, my vote is no.
Iowyn, my vote is no.
And number four, MI-2025-001-287-1627 South A Street, my vote is no.
Michael Johns, my vote is no.
Tanetta Graham, my vote is no.
Ryan McAdams, my vote is no.
Ty Owen, my vote is no.
the next case mr mcadams has recused himself from the case so it's mi2025
zero zero four three eight seven townsend road leonard altieri is the attorney for the owner
good afternoon everyone
Good afternoon, everyone.
Counsel, could you please state your name and spell for the stenographer?
counsel could you please state your name and spell
My name is Leonard, L-E-O-N-A-R-D.
Last name is Altieri, A-L-T-I-E-R-I, with the law firm of Claire Harrison Harvey Brandsburg.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Could you identify your client and relationship to the property?
My client is the Steamfitters Local Union 420 Realty Incorporated.
Our vice chair has a few questions.
Good afternoon. Have you submitted your documents five days in advance of this hearing?
I have.
And do you waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Thank you. You can proceed with your case.
There's, by the way, unanimous support from Parkwood Association, 26 total votes.
Everybody can see my screen? Perfect.
So again, thank you and good afternoon, Mr. Chairman and members of the board.
Leonard Altieri at the law firm of Claire Harrison, representing the applicant, Steam
Fitters Local Union 420 Realty Incorporated.
I have with me this afternoon, Jim Schnell, the business manager of the Steam Fitters
Local 420, as well as Rustin Oler, who is our architect for this project.
So the property we're talking about is the Steam Fitters Local 420 facility.
I don't want to just call it a union hall because it's more than just a union hall for
what the application, what part of this application is about.
So the steam fitters is going through a massive redevelopment of their project, of their property, excuse me.
It's no longer just a union hall.
It's also a benefits facility, but it will also be a training facility to ensure that the next generation of steam fitters are up to date with the latest technology.
It'll be a state-of-the-art facility for continuing education as well for our local journeymen and journeywomen.
So during the day, it'll be used for our apprentices to learn the trade.
And in the evening, it'll be used as continuing legal education.
This training facility will allow for our skilled union workforce to continue while providing for family-sustaining jobs.
Our client has made a long-term investment in the community by not just renovating this facility but choosing to stay there for years to come.
So what we're talking about, you know, we've already gotten the approval for the actual renovation part, and now what we're talking about is signage.
So we do have, as the chairman said, a unanimous letter of support from the Parkwood Civic Association.
There are 26 members that were there.
All 26 voted in favor of both the number of signs that we are proposing as well as the square footage.
The property itself is located in the Light Industrial Zoning District.
And just to orient the board where it is, we're speaking about this area right here.
Again, surrounded by predominantly warehouses, not a lot of residential structures or any really in the direct vicinity of it.
This is what it looks like from the street view prior to the renovations that's going on right now.
Similarly, from the other side as well.
So with regards to the signage that we are proposing, again, this is a facility that serves multiple purposes.
It's both a union hall but also a location for our benefit fund office and then also a training facility for both the apprentices and then also the existing journeymen and journeywomen.
When we applied to LNI, we received a refusal for both the total number of signs, specifically the freestanding signs, we're only allowed one per frontage.
We are proposing to do two, which is located right here.
That's what the sign will look like.
And then also the total number of square footage for the signs in general.
So looking at it from a building elevation perspective, in the west elevation, the signage is already existing.
The proposed signage from the South Elevation, again, is the 420 logo, the Benefit Fund Office.
Again, from the East Elevation, showing the existing signage is already there for the training facility, but also the logo.
And then similarly, for the South, the East, and the North, the logo as well.
Now, Mr. Schnell will tell you, if I was to have him testify on everything, he's obviously there every day.
because the building is not you know there's not adequate signage there they have people
constantly coming in and out of the building attempting to go to different sides to get to
the different offices this signage will help not only identify the different locations within the
building itself but also be a source of pride for the local 420 and again showing that investment
that they have made in the community and again the refusal which we received for the total number of
freestanding signs, and then also for the square footage, and the RCO, again, voted in unanimous
support for that. I do have Mr. Schnell here, who I'll have adopted my testimony, and I also have
the architect, Mr. Oler, who can be available for any questions as well.
Why don't you bring Mr. Schnell one? We're not used to see you sitting on that sign, but it's a...
Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman. Could you please stay your name and spell for this tonight?
Sure. My name is James Snell. That's J-A-M-E-S.
Sure. My name is James Snell. That's J-A-M-E-S, Snell, S-N-E-L-L.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do, Mr. Chairman.
Please proceed, counsel.
Mr. Snell, can you tell the board your relationship to this application?
Sure. I'm the business manager of Steamfitters Local Union 420.
I've been there, it'll almost be seven years, and we decided now is the time to make a major
investment in upgrading our facility, mainly our training center.
And so you were authorized to speak on behalf of the applicant this afternoon?
Yes, sir.
And were you present in the room when I made the presentation of the zoning board?
Yes, sir.
And is everything you heard me say true and accurate to the best of your knowledge,
information, and belief?
Yes, sir.
Thank you. Questions from the board?
Oh, I'm sorry, one other. Mr. Chairman, you would adopt that testimony as your own?
I certainly would.
Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
Questions from the board?
Questions from our attorney?
Not at this time, Mr. Chair.
Questions from the public, first to coordinating RCO?
Other effects?
I don't see any answers, Mr. Chair.
Okay. Other effective RCOs?
no answer district councilman once again no answer anyone else
no answer planning commission amy boyd with the planning commission the comprehensive plan
recommends no change in zoning to the existing i1 light industrial the appellant has not
demonstrated that there are unique physical conditions or circumstances of the property
they would prevent it from being used in conformance with the zoning code the planning
commission recommends that the board deny the requested variances for sign count and size.
Thank you. MI 2025 004387 14400 Towson Road. I vote yes. Michael Johns. My vote is yes.
Cheryl Gaston. My vote is yes. Tanetta Graham. My vote is yes.
Ty Owen. My vote is yes. Thank you. You have your vote and I would admit that I've only been lost
one's trying to find that place thank you very much mr chairman a half hour to get where i
thank you very much everyone thank you board
and the appointment is later
Number four.
Alex, number four, MI2025-004-378-2749-Tremont Street.
Alex Goldberg is the attorney.
counsel could you please state your name and spell for the stenographer
sure my name is alex goldberg a-l-e-x-g-o-l-d-b-e-r-g 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? Sure. My client is Juan Bonilla. He's sitting to my left and he's the owner of the
property. I would tell you that we have a letter of support from the Northeast Community Civic
Alliance and an applicant also provided seven form letters six from that particular block.
Our vice chair has a few questions. Good afternoon. Have you emailed your documents five days in
advance of this hearing? I have. And do you waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its
accuracy.
Thank you.
You can share your screen and proceed.
Some technical issues with the screen, possibly.
Oh, okay. I just missed that off. All right. Let me go full screen mode.
Okay. So as I mentioned previously, my client Juan sitting to my left, he's the owner occupier
of this single family home. He's lived there with his family since 2013. In 2015, he
in 2015 he closed off of the garage which is a case I've been in front of the
board for many times and in around 2020 he added a rear addition some covered
outdoor space the reason we're here is because of the garage but in the
application language you can see reference to that rear addition as well
we have the notice of refusal surface parking spaces are are prohibited in required front yards
as the board has probably seen from the aerial photos there's surface parking available in front
of all of these houses in this neighborhood this is not out of character for homeowners to close
off the garages and just use their surface parking as their accessory off-street parking instead
and turn that garage space into additional living space which is what juan has done turning that
into a guest bedroom his family has filled up all the bedrooms in the house and you know just
wanted to be able to have an additional guest bedroom so that's our one refusal we have a
letter of support we met on 1028 with northeast community civic alliance there's reference to
only positive feedback in regards to this project there were 14 attendees several near neighbors
including adjacent neighbors were there in support who Juan has great relationships with
and were willing to come out to this community meeting which was in person you know we didn't
hear any instances of disturbances to neighbors or anything like that and and you know we're just
hoping that he could you know get through this process successfully we have letters of support
as previously referenced 2747 and 2748 across the street you can see just clicking through here
there are several letters of support seven in total
here's some nearby comparable converted garages on Tremont street these all these properties were
all built around 1959 and they're all sort of laid out the same way this classic northeast
philadelphia home with front loading garages
here's an aerial view you can actually see in the aerial image
all of these surface parking uh you know that that people are doing in
in front of their homes which is exactly what we're proposing to do and
what we have been doing since uh 2015 when this work was done
of course we would agree to a proviso to obtain a certificate of occupancy for
the work um at the conclusion of this process if the board is inclined inclined to grant the
variance it is an rsa3 property we're not seeking any use variance it's a single family home and
will remain that way this is what the front of the property looks like there's the notice posting
here it is in 2017 as i mentioned the work was done in 2015 this is the back it's a covered patio
again not seeking a variance for this obviously we'll need to obtain permits to legalize the work
as built but i just wanted to include that for the board's reference
to the right of the property again you see all the parking the surface parking
that's being utilized this is the space that was converted this was the former garage it's
a guest bedroom i guess right now really just being used for storage
here's a plan i'll zoom in on the floor plans so you can see
This is that required front yard, right?
So this is where the parking is.
There's a door to the right that leads to a utility room and a laundry room.
The door to the left leads into that guest bedroom.
There are stairs obviously going up into the main part of the home
as well as access to a storage room in the rear part of the home.
And then you can see sort of a before and after of the work here.
Again, 1028 was our RCO meeting.
our application for appeal, the deed to the property, and the certificate of tax clearance.
With that, I'd ask my client to adopt my testimony.