showing that we did meet with the community, our application for appeal that we filed with the ZBA,
our deed to the property, showing that IRA development is the owner of the property,
certificate of tax clearance, showing that we're in good standing with the City of Philadelphia.
At the conclusion of my presentation, I will have Mr. Pezzi adopt my testimony, and then we'll take any questions from the board.
So first things first, this is a notice of refusal where CMX2 property.
Here, we're actually trying to decrease the amount of density here.
where CMX2, given the size of a lot of 751 square feet,
we would be allowed to build a commercial on the first floor
and then one residential unit above.
Here, we're only looking to put single-family use.
We have three refusals.
First, because we're not trying to put any commercial
on the ground floor, we're being refused
with regards to that.
As you'll see in our presentation materials,
there is a history of only single-family use
that I can find for this property.
Also, you'll see in the presentation materials,
a picture in 2007 from Google Earth
showing this is a vacant lot.
So this has been a vacant lot for some time
and we're looking and hoping to put single-family use here.
And you'll also see pictures of surrounding properties
which are commercially zoned,
which are also fully residential in nature,
like we're proposing.
And then we have two dimensional refusals.
One is the maximum occupied area where 80% is allowed, which is 587.88 square feet, where we're proposing 84.4 lot coverage for 620.67 square feet.
Again, because it's a small size of the lot and to have a functional floor plan,
we're requesting that additional lot coverage of our building structure.
And again, it's not out of character with what's surrounding us as official see
with the blown up drawing that we received or took from the city's website.
And then also we have a rear yard setback variance request.
While nine feet is required, seven feet is proposed, again, to have a functional floor plan.
we're asking for that additional two fees
for only the single family use.
And again, it's not out of character
to surrounding properties.
So we do have a letter.
There were more people against our project
than for our project.
It was a closed vote.
It was eight to 12, so 20 people showed up.
And there were, these are the reasons why there were,
these are the things that came out in the community,
which, again, shows why we should,
this variance request should be approved.
You know, the property has been vacant since, can the board see the letter?
Yeah, make it just a little bigger if possible.
Oh, I think, I don't know how.
Okay, that's fine. That's fine.
Okay. But it says the property has been vacant since at least 2007 and the owners like to build a single family home consistent with the rest of the block.
The property is small. It would be difficult to use as part, to use part of it as a commercial unit.
Again, factual. We have a 751-square-foot lot, and it would be rather difficult to put a commercial unit there.
It's also out of character. There's really not much commercial around there.
This is the residential component of the block or the neighborhood.
Second, the manual variances are needed to make the floor plan work comfortably.
The proposed seven-foot yard is larger than their rear yard next door, which is only about five feet.
Again, we'll look at the pictures. Again, factual.
The plans for three bedrooms and three baths, you know, this had more to do with, you know,
then they mentioned the price range, which is not really a zoning consideration, but
we discussed that.
Four, oh, talks about the, you know, the level of construction and how long it's going to
take, not a zoning matter.
Now, this is the matter that where I don't understand where we're going with this, but
it says, although the owner is willing to eliminate the roof deck, they are not willing
to eliminate the third floor.
So, again, we're not asking for a height variance. We're at 38 feet. This neighborhood is a mix between three and two-story building structures. But again, something that we're being asked of is not out of character and it's not required to us with code.
uh so that was the first thing we're not willing to reduce the third floor uh parking and the
anticipated sale uh okay the community expressed concerns about the third floor parking and the
parking and the anticipated sale price and voted to oppose the project. So the sales price is not
anticipated sale price and voted to oppose the project
zoning repeated. Parking, they wanted us to actually put an off-street parking spot on the
property. And we said two things. It's too small of a lot. We can't fit off-street parking on there.
And if we did, that would require another variance with a curb cut, which would take a parking spot
other way for the streets. So, and the fact that they're trying to then encourage us to put a
mixed use property there would probably make the parking situation even worse.
And then in terms of getting rid of the third floor, they wanted us to basically have 100%
lock coverage, where we would have a two-story structure with 100% lock coverage. I indicated
to them that that would increase the intensity of our variances, where we would take away the
light and air of the property to the left of us to basically seal them. I didn't think they would
appreciate that, but it would increase the variances. It would be out of character with
the neighborhood to have full lock coverage. So it increased the lock coverage variance that
we're requesting, and it would increase the rear yard setback variance requesting. We thought that
that was out of character. So simply asking for a single family is something that was more moderate
and reasonable under the circumstances based on what we're proposing. So, but again, eight people
were for this project, 12 people were against it. A lot of them were against it for non-zoning
related issues. And the ones that were against it for zoning related issues wanted us to increase
our variances even more. So the property history. So I just pulled this from Atlas. This was a
vacant lots. So what we're requesting is simply in line with what the history of this property
has been. And then nearby commercially zoned properties that are residential in nature,
next door to us, 1303 Farson Street is also a CMX property. It's only residential. 1301 North 51st
Street, again, simply residential. 5002 and 5004 West Thompson Street, again, where the
corner of forest and west thompson street is single family same as 50 16 50 18 50 20 50 22
all nearby all single family all commercially zones and then the maps of the area as you can
see there's a decent amount of the cmx and these are all the properties we're talking about
so again this is not a commercial corridor this is residential in nature
and then this is our property from a google maps perspective and then this is what we pulled from
the state's website so this is our property right now we're a vacant lot as you can see 1303 1302
and 1300 um all would run afoul of the lot coverage requirements as well as the rare set
rear yard setback requirements of the philadelphia zoning code so what we're requesting a seven foot
setback and 84% lot coverage is more in line than what these neighborhood properties are.
But again, if we were required to do, by the way, full lot coverage here, we would completely seal
the light and air of 1303, which again, I don't think the property owner would appreciate. That
was requested by the community to get some support from some community members. And then photographs
of the property, again, we're just a vacant lot corner of Thompson and Barsink. And then this is
the property as of 2007 i can't tell how much longer that's been a vacant lot but it's been
because you know google earth only goes back as far as 2007 but you know for 15 years this has
been a vacant lot uh and we're hoping to develop it as a single family structure to fall in line
with what's surrounding us and then forest and streets are right of the property again
residential nature forest and streets are left of the property which is one which would be
Thompson Street, residential nature. And then this property is owned by Kumas Homes. Kumas Homes
has been in existence for almost 15 years. They're headquartered in Philadelphia. They're
in Point Breeze Avenue, in the Point Breeze section of Philadelphia. What they do is, you know,
take vacant lots like this, put, you know, nice single-family homes similar to this. And this
is just an example of one where you see hardwood floors, you know, nice kitchens,
you know nice bathrooms nice light in there and you know these are the floor plans we're trying
to keep the traditional philadelphia look you can see there's a cornice line you can see there's
lentils you can see that there's a flat building facade with a you know brick facades you can see
this from the front for the west thompson street side as well and then you can just look at the
And then you can just look at the floor plans, open floor plan, go up, you know, three steps, four steps, go into an open floor plan, living room, dining room, kitchen, you go downstairs, there's just a family room down there as well.
floor plans, open floor plan for it to go up or flight, you know.
You go to the second floor, there's two bedrooms, a bath, washer and dryer, go to a third floor master suite, and then there's a roof deck.
And then we did meet with the community May 12th at 6 p.m.
There were 149 addresses notified of that community meeting.
These are the list of the addresses.
Proof of mailing to those addresses.
Our application for appeal to the CBA, along with our notice of refusal and our project information form.
our deed to the property showing that IRA development LLC is the owner of the property
and our certificate of tax clearance showing that IRA development is a good standing with
the city with respect to the real estate taxes for this property. With that being said, I'm going
to unshare my screen temporarily. I would ask that Mr. Eze virtually raise his hand so he can
about my testimony, and they will be more than happy to take any questions from the board.
Would you state your name, please, sir, and spell for the court reporter?
What is that?
Hello, can you hear me?
Yes, my name is Ifai Chukueze.
it's i f e a n y i c h u k w u last name e z e right you swear affirm to tell the truth the
whole truth and nothing but the truth correct proceed counsel uh yeah mr azzy you heard
everything i stated today correct and you're true and correct yes you got this in your own testimony
i do thank you questions from the board no mr chairman
no mr chairman questions or comments from the virtual audience
mr chair i see a miss elise young with her hand raised i have allowed her to speak
thank you could you please state your name and spell for the court reporter
yes my name is eloise young first name e-l-o-i-s-e last name young
just for could you spell for the court reporter your last name please
y-o-u-n-g thank you do you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but
the truth yes i do please proceed okay on may 12th first uh good afternoon to the board and
mr chairman on may 12th hmc squared hosted a virtual meeting at which the community members
voted to oppose the variance requests initiated by the owners of 1301 Farson Street. At the
meeting, we were informed by Kumas Homes that they expect the three-story home they want to
build to sell for between $325,000 and $350,000. A two-story structure in line with the rest of
homes on the block could certainly be built and sold for less kumas homes has demonstrated no
hardship other than a desire to max out the building size to maximize its profits to say
that building a two-story home on a block of two-story homes would block the air and light
of its neighbors seems illogical the neighbor the owners purchased the lot through an entity named
IRA Development LLC in 2018 and sat on the property until now. They are unwilling to
consider a suggestion to continue to hold off on the project until the supply chain crisis
is better stabilized. Instead, they wish to build a three-story home on a block of
two-story homes now. Kumas Homes is a savvy real estate development company that has built over
100 homes. They understood the zoning and chose to buy this lot knowing that there was a chance
that a variance would not be granted. While we do appreciate their willingness to remove the
roof deck from their plans, we respectfully urge the zoning board to deny the dimensional
variance requests at this time. Thank you. Thank you for calling in. Is there anyone else in the
virtual audience has. Mr. Jack Hanley has his hand raised again. Do I allow him to speak? Sure.
Mr. Hanley, please unmute yourself. I wait to be sworn in.
wait to be sworn in could you could you state your name and spell for the court reporter please
Could you could you state your name and spell for the court reporter please?
could you state your name please and spell it
jason do we see him he appears to be having technical problems chair
but we have another individual
we can move on
who's the next person Jason
next individual is a number ending
in 3458 I have allowed them to speak
could you state your name and spell
for the court reporter please
yes good afternoon my name is Mark Harris
M-E-R-K-H-E-R-I-S
do you swear
You're a firm to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.
Yes, I do.
Proceed, sir.
Yeah, and my apologies if my voice is a little distorted.
I just came from the dentist.
Okay, fine.
The applicant wishes to build a large three-story structure of 2,482 square feet,
occupied with a complete roof deck and piled house.
This is more than twice the size of an evening structure of 1,215 square feet.
This structure will total 47 inches overall,
twerp any structure on the block of small, two-story,
mostly two-bedroom row houses.
It will, contrary to absence claims, stick out like a sore thumb.
Now, this block on both sides actually can go all the way out to
up to Kershaw on the north, 50th over to 51st Street.
They're all two-story houses.
Three-story houses are the exception around here.