Mr. Holliman, is that you?
Phone number ending in 3552.
Thank you, Mr. Holloman.
There you go, Ms. Holloman. Wonderful.
I'm sorry. That's not Mr. Holloman. Isn't that Adrian?
Yes, I just wanted to tell you.
I'm sorry. I'm sorry.
We're going to have to bounce you out, Adrian.
There he is.
thank you okay thank you miss l you're more than welcome miss sunken mr halliman what's the last
four of your phone number please i have it
9-1-1-6 thank you
Mr. Holloman, are you able to speak through Zoom because I don't see your phone number
listed yeah your audio is breaking up so you can you hear me oh now i can
could you say something
Thank you.
It looks like he's struggling here.
We have Jim and we have Ish, so we have enough votes.
For a quorum.
Right.
Well, we can proceed as you wish, Chair. We can start the recording.
Well, why don't we start the recording, and then we'll figure it out, okay?
Good morning. I had a question. Could he just vote with a thumbs up if he can't get audio?
No, because we're transcribing. He needs to, yeah, but thank you for the suggestion.
He needs to call in. Tom, can you hear us? Can you give us a thumbs up if you can hear us?
okay he can hear us okay try to go in through the app on your phone so we have you on audio
that way because your audio on your computer is unfortunately not working today okay thanks Tom
Keena, do we see his number?
Not yet, Chair.
Yeah, currently, I only see one calling user with the area code of 609.
All right, Hillary, I think we're going to have to start with the three.
Hillary, I think we're going to have to start with the three.
That's fine, Mr. Chair.
That's fine, Mr. Chair.
Why don't we start?
Okay, it's already recording, Chair.
You can proceed as you wish.
How many people are in?
Do you see?
Yes, we have 37 attendees.
Okay, thank you.
Good morning, everyone.
My name is Bill Bergman, and I will be chairing this morning's EBA hearing.
With me is our Vice Chair, Ismail Shahid.
Present, Mr. Chairman.
Thomas Holloman, our board member.
Mr. Holloman's here. He's having a hard time getting through on his computer.
And James Snell, our board member.
Present, Chair.
Also present is Hillary Emerson, our attorney, and our executive director, Tanya Sunken.
Here's our virtual format.
Be advised, the proceedings are being recorded.
Video will be available by contacting tanyasunken at phil.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 9 to raise your hand and star 6 to unmute.
To enter 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.
All comments should be directed to our Executive Director, Tanya Sunken.
Let's look at our schedule for today.
Number two, MI 2022-007-252-370-3730 North 18th Street.
That case is continued.
Number four.
MI-2023
002-871-2146
Bridge Street
That case is continued
Number 7
Hold on one minute please
Number 7
MI-2022-006-734-2402-Spruce Street.
Is Mr. Nockamson in the audience?
Good morning, Mr. Chair.
This is Jason Hiddell, who will be your co-host for today.
Mr. Nockamson has been allowed to speak.
Good morning, Mr. Nockamson. Could you state your name, please, and spell it for the court stenographer?
Alan Nockamson, A-L-A-N, last name Nockamson, N-O-C-H-U-M-S-O-N.
Right. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Mr. Nockamson, this case, 2402 Spruce Street, this is the third listing. I understand you're looking for a continuance?
Yes. So this is a historic property and there have been requests by the community to make modifications to the exterior of the property, which are not zoning related, but we're trying to act in good faith with the community.
And we're trying to work through the historic commission on how to most efficiently make those modifications while also pursuing that zoning matter.
So I would actually request that we are the moving party.
We don't want to clog the board's listings, but we do need additional time to kind of work through some of those historic measures.
Okay, thank you.
So MI 2022-006-734-2402 Spruce Street, the case is continued.
Thank you.
Thank you, sir.
Number 13, MI 2023-002-905-4721 Van Kirk Street.
That case is continued.
Number 15, MI 2023-002-909-2651 North 17th Street.
The case is continued.
And number 19, MI 2023-002-867-1775 Bridge Street, that case is continued.
Is there anyone in the audience who has comments relative to the cases that have been continued?
Okay, Mr. Chair, I have a James Runca with their hand raised.
Okay, Mr. Chair, I have a James Ronca with their hand raised. I have allowed them to speak.
I have allowed them.
Good morning. Could you state your name, please, and spell for the court stenographer?
Yes, James Ronca. It's R-O-N-C-A.
Right. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
We do.
What case are you calling about?
2402 Spruce Street.
Yes, sir.
We had submitted a number of documents in support of our opposition to the zoning variance requested by the owners.
This is the third time it's been listed.
The property is currently being used for visitor accommodations, which we've observed on numerous occasions, as have other neighbors.
And we have prepared three times now to defend our position.
And we're wondering if we'll ever get to the hearing on this and whether the property will continue to be used in a manner that's in violation of the city ordinances while we wait.
um you you we will get to this case i purposely called the attorney to see what their his reasons
were at this point the reasons sound legit it to me legitimate to me and uh we we will move
forward with this case i guarantee you okay all right and as far as what they're doing now um
this is the zoning board i i will check with our council to see what we can do for you for that
okay thank you mr ronka yeah so mr ronka um are just to clarify are you an attorney and who are
you representing all right so we're the owners we're the owners of the property next door but
i am also an attorney okay okay thank you so are you here on behalf of your of yourself then as
as a neighbor i'm i'm here on behalf of myself and and my wife as a neighbor but we happen to
also be attorneys. So I, I don't know how that squares up with your appearance system.
Okay. No problem. I'll, I will make a note. Thank you.
All right. All right. Thank you. And thank you for taking the time to call on him. We appreciate it.
Thank you, sir. Is there anyone else in the audience who has a comments relative to what
we've continued? Okay. Mr. Chair. Yes. We need to pause for a second. Mr. Shahid
um got um knocked out of the zoom and he's unable to get back in
um tony can you please send another link to mr shaheed
sure thank you
um thank you everyone sorry for the delay um we're going to look at cases that we don't have
exhibits for? Number one, MI 2022-007-304-1901 Chestnut Street. This is the second listing.
There is an identical appeal pending for this property with a 2023 appeal number on 110 will
We'll be 1-10-24.
Is Melvin Brown or Sung Ho Kim in the audience?
Mr. Chair, I do not see any hands raised for this matter.
All right, thank you.
So MI 2022-007-37304, 1901 Chestnut Street.
There's an identical appeal pending.
We do not have documents.
I vote to dismiss.
James Snell, my vote is to dismiss.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is to dismiss.
Thank you.
I think Mr. Holloman was trying to vote.
Mr. Holloman, I think your volume is very low.
I don't know if you could, I could hear you very faintly.
Yeah, I can't hear you.
I can't hear you now.
I will keep working on it.
We have the three votes.
Thank you.
Number nine, MI 2022-006735-4031 Spring Garden Street.
Jeffrey Young is the attorney.
We have no exhibits on this.
This is the third listing.
Mr. Chair, I do not see any hands for this matter.
So MI 2022-006735, 4031 Spring Garden Street, Mr. Young's cases are being transferred to someone else.
4031 Spring Garden Street. Mr. Young's cases are being transferred to someone else.
This case is continued, but must be tried next time.
Number 16.
Excuse me, Mr. Chair, we have a hand raised. I'm not sure if it's related to this case or not.
Hi, could you state your name, please, and spell for the court stenographer?
Hello, respectable people on the phone. My name is Giannis Sidnor. Y-U-H-N-I-S, last name S as in Sam, Y-G-G as in David, N as in Nancy, O, Oscar, R as in Robert.
Do you swear a firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
I swear to tell the whole truth, the truth, and nothing but the truth.
Okay, okay. So could you tell me what case you're interested in?
It's at that 4031 Spring Garden Street. My challenge, my most respectable elected and appointed officials is that this case has been kicked down the road to the best example of any government, Democrat, Republican, neutral person back and forth.
As a homeowner, as a taxpayer, and the like, I plead with you that we are tired of this thing being continued.
If I'm not mistaken, it is over.
This is the third time.
Listen to me.
Listen to me.
Mr. Sidnor, listen to me.
Listen to me.
It is the third time.
if you heard my comments
this will be heard the next time
one way or the other
and I'm sorry for any
inconveniences you may have
can I say to you
yes you can
yes can you hear me now
I can I can hear you
with all due respect I want to say
thank you
for saying the next time
I must be courteous
That's the way my parents raised me.
Well, thank you.
Thank you so much.
And we do appreciate your phone call.
Thank you.
Okay, so I'm going to move on to number 16.
MI 2022, 003-365-1216 Lycoming Street.
Ronald Talbert is the listed owner.
No exhibits, third listing.
Mr. Chair, I do not see any hands raised for this matter either.
Okay, so number 16, MI 2022-003-365-1216 West, by Coming Street, I vote to dismiss.
James Snell, my vote is to dismiss.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is to dismiss.
Thank you.
And number 18, MI 2020.
Excuse me, Mr. Chair.
I think we missed going over number 12.
There's also no exhibits.
Hold on a minute.
MI 2022
336 1140
South 54th Street
Ronald Talbert
and Nick's Realty are listed
owners no exhibits third
listing there has
been no record of an RCO meeting
Mr. Talbert
i do not see any hands for that um matter sir thank you so mi2022 003336 1140 south 54th street
no exhibits third listing there has not been an rco meeting i vote to dismiss
james snell my vote is to dismiss
number
number 18 mi 2022 006 997 1101 anchor street rochelle khan is the owner this is the second
listening
Ms. Kahn
I do not see any hands for this
I do not see any hands for this matters, sir.
So MI 2022-006-997-1101 Anchor Street.
On 517-23, the owner appeared, was advised that we did not have any documents.
This is the second time she is not here.
I voted dismiss.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is to dismiss.
James Snell, my vote is to dismiss.
Thank you.
We're going to hear our first case, number five, MI 2022 003 671 1825 South 22nd Street.
Rene Adams is the owner, pro se.
His application is for visitor accommodation in an existing structure.
The proposed use visitor accommodation is prohibited in the RM1 district.
But there is a letter of support from the Point Breeze Community Development Corporation.
Ms. Adams will be rejoining as the panelists shortly, sir.
Good morning, Ms. Adams.
Good morning.
Good morning, Ms. Adams.
Could you state your name, please, and spell it for the court stenographer?
renee adams r-e-n-e-e adams a-d-a-m-s right do you swear or affirm to tell the truth the
whole truth and nothing but the truth yes could you please turn on your video
good morning are can you see me yeah our vice chair has
few questions for you okay okay hello ma'am have you emailed in all the required documents and
exhibits to proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing yes thank you please
Please proceed and share the screen.
Green button at the bottom.
Yeah, I'm working on it.
Thank you.
they have your documents ready yep pulling them up
are you able to see it no
you must hit that green button at the bottom of your screen
i thought i did give me one second and once you hit that it should actually what documents
would you like to share
okay i'll get the green button can you guys see it yet nope you still have to select the
documents after you hit that button are you able to see my screen yeah
all right calm down we see it up top thank you
okay if you can see to the right of the screen that's our zoning notice we see that okay
We see that.
Do you have photos of the property?
Can you show us the photos of the property?
Mm-hmm.
okay so okay what is the white house or the brown book no no it's the the one that's
only one person can talk okay so renee which house is it i'm trying to get the right photo
So, okay, all right.
You can, oh, I need the next photo.
This is not the photo.
Is there any way you guys can assist?
Okay, this, the photo that's on the screen now,
it's the house, the charge house.
If you guys can kind of like walk me through this
share some of the burnt photos first because i don't know what's wrong with my system and i
deeply apologize so what is it the house that's burnt yes this is where we first acquired the
property okay all right so what's it look like now okay what it looks like now one second
this is what it looks like inside now um i do i did submit um pictures of the outside for you
guys i understand so so so this whole house you wanted for for an airbnb am i correct the whole
entire house yes sir okay and you went to um the point breeze community development coalition
And they were in support of you?
Do you remember what the vote was?
It was 23, I think, to two.
In support of you?
Questions from the board?
No, Chair.
No, Chair.
Questions or comments from our attorney, Hillary Emerson?
not at this time mr chair questions or comments from the virtual audience
yes mr chair i have a hand up from an india murphy i have allowed them to speak
hi could you please state your name and spell for the court stenographer
hello that was an accident i did not mean to raise my hand i thought i took that down
sorry all right okay all right is there anyone else in the virtual audience
yes i have albert little page with their hand raised i have allowed them to speak hi mr little
page could you state your name please and spell for the court sonography my name is albert little
page a l b e r t little page l i t t l e p a g e right do you swear or affirm to tell the truth
the whole truth nothing but the truth i do are you a neighbor no i'm not yeah well i am yes i am
but i am i'm actually the president of the point breeze community development that's fine
sure please proceed so i am calling in i've i met with miss adams and also met with the physically
met with the neighbors on her block spoke to the neighbors on her block who are in support of the
project we hosted a meeting which uh she i believe her number was correct uh in support of that we
sent a letter in in support of the project so the neighbors being as though the neighbors supported
her project the point breeze community development coalition joins in with the community and
supporting the project that the adams have put forth mr little page thank you so much for taking
the time to call in we appreciate your input is there anyone else in the first audience
i do not see any further hands mr chair leaning commission good morning this is uh ron bednar
uh first name ron r-o-n last name bednar b-e-d-n-a-r all right do you swear for him to tell
All right. Do you swear for him to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth i do
Thank you.
Please proceed, sir.
This property is indicated for residential use on the city plan.
Our adopted district plan recommends no change to the existing 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 in conformity with the code.
Therefore, we recommend the request of variance not be granted.
Thank you.
MI 2022-003-671-1825-S22nd Street. I vote yes with proviso. Temporary variance expires 12-15-26.
James Snell, my vote is yes with proviso.
you have your votes thank you
number 14
with you
number 14 mi20230029569312 with sonoming street mariel vasquez is the owner this application
is for change of use for the internal parking garage to accessory storage for use of accessory
parking in the front yard. Service parking spaces in the detached garages and carports
are prohibited in the required front, side, and rear yards. The proposed change of use
for the garage could eliminate the accessory parking space required in the RSC3 zoning
district. Ms. Vasquez.
There is a letter of support from East Tarsdale Civic Association.
Excuse me, Mr. Chair.
They've been promoted to panelists.
Good morning.
Could you state your name, please, and spell for the court stenographer?
Good morning.
It's Marielle Vasquez, M-A-R-I-E-L-L-E-V-A-S-Q-U-E-Z.
Great.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Could you turn on your video, and our vice chair has just a few questions for you.
Good morning, ma'am.
Have you emailed in all the required documents and exhibits that is needed and required to proceed with these kids?
five days in advance of this hearing yes the last um that i sent was um yesterday they uh
um specified on the deed of the home thank you please proceed and share your screen
this fast question could you move your camera a little bit because we're not
we're not seeing you yes i'm sorry hold on one second i'm trying to turn it around
Ms. Fesquez, are you there?
I'm sorry.
I'm just trying to turn the video around.
Let's see.
Hi, Ma'am.
What device are you using for the video?
I am using a tablet.
it's um actually a microsoft okay so you have to get in front of that little circle
which is your camera on your tablet right in order for us to proceed we need to see you
yes okay with me one second
I'm just checking the video settings okay here you see me now all right perfect we see you okay
um why don't you share your screen
All right. Can you see me now? Can you see the video and the
screen? Please proceed. Thank you. So good morning, Mr. Chair, members of the board.
Again, my name is Mariel Vasquez, and I'm seeking a variant for the permit refusal on this residence for turning the garage into a form of storage space with a pedestrian entrance.
Again, my name is Marielle Vasquez, and I'm seeking a variance for the permit refusal.
It's more specifically replacing the garage door with a 36-inch wide door and a framed wall.
I own this property with my brother.
It's a two-story ranch twin.
He resides with his five-year-old son and wife in the upstairs, which is considered the main.
And my mother resides in the bottom floor.
We purchased this particular property because of the layout and the structure of the home for my mother's comfortable living.
And I also want to add that searching for the house or a house in 2022 was close to a battlefield.
Many homes, you know, with a similar layout that we were looking for my mother.
We were outbid, so this was the best that we were able to find for her comfortable living.
As you see here, the deed of the property state my brother and I as the owners, and I also have a notarized letter of authorization from him as well.
For my mother, we're doing the variance to make the bottom floor to more of her comfortable living.
She has specific health issues.
Specifically, she suffers from vertigo and she has a heart murmur.
The vertigo came from her having a stroke and she continues receiving ongoing health medical attention because of her murmur.
She's 72 years of age with health issues, so it was in her best interest to provide her more of an open storage space to have less issues with her vertigo.
This provides her the convenience of having a pedestrian door that opens to an open space that we foresee her using some assistance, including a wheelchair.
So the refusal is to...
Ms. Fast-Quest, why don't you go to the photos?
So this is photos from the before and after.
So this is what it currently looks like now.
And this is what it looked like before.
I have also included some of the pictures to reflect how the neighbors in the same street use their driveway as their designated parking spot.
Rarely anybody uses at all their garage for their cars.
This is the entire street.
And then this is a block over.
And I have also included on the same street neighbors who have also changed the outside of their garage.
to a similar appearance. And this is the letter of support from the Neighborhood Association.
And then these are the receipts of the mail with the same notice of the same meeting that
were sent out. I have also included, per the RCO's recommendation, the homestead exception
because I know that this is a concern that came up in the meeting, which specified that
this is for only a residential one-family-use home, nothing more, and the certificate of
tax clearance per the requirement. These are the photos that reflect the posting of the
notification of this particular meeting right outside the home. And these are photos that
show that once the work was stopped, once we received the notice of refusal. And then
lastly, I have two supporting letters from the engineer on the reasoning of the work
and the plans for the variance thought out.
I believe he joined the Zoom meeting
so we could speak a little bit more
on the specific of it.
His name is Joseph Bernardino
and he inspected the work confirming
that no structure change was made.
Thank you.
Okay, questions from the board?
And Ms. Vasquez, if there's questions
relative to the engineering,
we'll call your engineer,
but at this point i'm going to take it to the board so questions from the board no thank you
questions or comments mark tourney hillary emerson um yes mr chair i just wanted to
clarify with miss vasquez um so the refusal says accessory storage but is this place can
is this area going to be turned into a living area no okay so is there going to be access from
the accessory storage to the rest
the accessory storage to the rest of the first floor it already has an existing access to it so
of the first floor?
It already has
yes okay all right so it just makes it easier to get to the storage direct access to the storage
okay thank you you're welcome questions or comments from the virtual audience
i do not see any hands mr chair my planning commission
you got ron bednar city planning property is indicated for residential use on the city plan
given the physical circumstances of the site we recommend the request for guidance for granted
thank you mi2023 002 956 9312 whisson gnoming street i vote yes
james snell my vote is yes
miss vasquez you have your votes thank you thank you very much thank you all right so we're going
to go back to the beginning of our list one two number three mi 2023 002 872 1713 north front
street adam laver is the attorney there's a letter of support from fishtown neighbors association
There's a letter of support from Kentington, Fishtown, Kentington Area Business Improvements, and a letter of non-opposition from Council Member Lozada.
Good morning, Mr. Chairman, members of the board.
Good morning, Mr. Laver. Could you state your name, please, for the court stenographer?
Adam Laver, L-A-V-E-R, Blank Rome, 1 Logan Square, Philadelphia, 19103.
Do you swear a firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, Mr. Chairman, I do.
Could you identify your client and relationship to this property?
Certainly. Blank Rome represents 1713 Front QOZB LLC, which does business as Khosla, K-H-O-S-L-A,
Khosla Properties, the owner of the property at 1713 North Front Street.
our vice chair has just a few questions sir thank you good morning counsel do you agree
to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy good morning mr vice chairman yes
i do have you emailed in all the required documents and exhibits that is needed and
required to proceed with this case five days in the pants of this hearing yes mr shaheed we have
thank you very much please proceed and share the screen thank you
Mr. Chairman, members of the Board, as I mentioned, Blanquoam represents the owner of the subject property, which is located at 1713 North Front Street.
Up on the screen before you is an aerial photo. I must say at the outset that this aerial photo is not up to date because this block and this neighborhood are changing so quickly.
I will show you more up-to-date photos, but I always like to begin with an aerial, and here you can see that what's relevant for context is we are immediately adjacent to the elevated line, the L.
There is a buy-right development currently under construction.
Coastal Properties is a 100% minority-owned Philadelphia-based real estate developer.
Anuj Khosla is the principal who's with us today, along with his director of development, Greg Oldsig.
Kano Design Architects, which has appeared before the board many times, has designed the project.
Harry Jackson Jantz and Thomas Keller are here.
On the screen now, you can see the by-right development, which is under construction,
the permit for the by-right development, and I've taken the liberty of just highlighting
the basics of what's underway. There's a previously approved approval for a six-story
structure with 55 dwelling units, ground floor commercial space, and ground floor accessory
parking for 10 automobiles. That's what was approved in conformity with the zoning code.
Let's go to some current context photos. So we're looking at the subject property.
I'll use the cursor. It includes this structure and the open area to the right. And you can see
that it's located next to Evil Genius, which is a neighboring watering hole. And to the right,
of the property, there's new construction
unrelated to this site.
Here you're just seeing a close-up of the subject property, the area that's unimproved.
Here, you're just seeing a close-up
of the subject property, the area that's un-
You're seeing to the left the Evil Genius, which is to the left of the subject property.
This is Evil Genius, the outdoor beer garden.
And to the right, by the shared party wall, is my client's property.
And beyond it, you can see new construction, another project.
This is a transit-oriented mixed-use prime. You can see the elevated line is right here.
And all around the subject property, there is new development that's under construction.
On both sides of the street, we're looking across the street,
actually to a project that I had taken before you previously.
The site is on CMX 12, as you'll see from the zoning map up on the screen, and moving
to the notice of refusal and the reason we're here.
So I had mentioned that there's a buy-write approval that's under construction.
We received feedback from the RCOs and from neighbors on the code-compliant development,
which suggested that the previously approved accessory parking, 10 required accessory parking
spaces, which took into consideration the appropriate parking reductions, disrupted
the pedestrian sidewalk along Front Street, and that off-street parking was not ideal at this
location. We took that feedback from the neighbors and the community and worked on revising the plans
By removing that required parking, one refusal was generated. That's what brings us here today.
It was suggested by stakeholders that the parking be removed and replaced with active
commercial card or retail commercial. The removal in response to that feedback is this single
refusal. So a couple things that are very relevant for your consideration. Number one,
the proposed change is more compatible with the commercial nature of Front Street.
But perhaps most importantly, upon additional review of the previously approved plans,
implementing the off-street parking, which has to be off of Front Street because there's only
one street frontage here, would be very challenging. The elevated line columns would make installation
difficult, if not nearly impossible, in that cars turning in and out would have
rate difficulty in the required turning radius in and out of that property.
Here you can see some conceptual renderings of the development. And what's really significant
about this conceptual rendering in front of you is that previously we would have had parking coming
in by the elevated, the L column, and some said that created some dead space. Well, here you can
see an idea of activation and working into the neighborhood plan with improvement to the
the previously approved plans for commercial that would be permitted within the CMX3 district,
which excited everybody.
On the screen before you, I know that the type is small, but it's not the details, but
more the concept that I wanted to bring to your attention.
In the upper right-hand corner, in red, you can see the area that previously would have
been parking now uh substituted with retail commercial in conformity with the overwhelming
support of all of the rcos the district council member and the next door neighbor
the coordinating rco letter of support is on the screen before you fishtown neighbors association
noting the positive nature of the activation of north front street as a commercial corridor in
the neighborhood benefits of removing a curb cut which would otherwise pose a hazard to pedestrians
and the attractive design enabled by removing the previously approved garage door.
Similarly, from the Fishtown Kensington Area Business Improvement District,
unanimous support, noting that the updated design would enhance the walkable district.
Quote, we believe that a dynamic commercial space with ample bicycle parking
and the expanded sidewalk is the best use for this area, end quote.
Council Member Lozada notes community support in her letter.
The immediately adjoining neighbor, which is the Evil Genius Beer Company, was deeply involved in reviewing this matter and expressed their support in a letter submitted to the board.
and expressed their support in a letter submitted to the board.
So, Mr. Chairman and members of the board,
the proposal fits into a dynamic, vibrant commercial corridor of the surrounding neighborhood.
The variance would represent the minimum variance to afford relief
and represent the least modification possible of the regulations at issue.
The grant of variance relief will not substantially increase congestion in the public streets,
increase the danger of fire or otherwise endanger the public health, safety, or general welfare.
This will not adversely affect transportation or unduly burdened water, sewer, school park,
or other public facilities. There are no environmental issues. I have the full team
here and at the appropriate time, Mr. Chairman, Mr. Khosla would be pleased to adopt and affirm,
I'm sure. Why don't you bring your client on and adopt your testimony?
Thank you. Mr. Anuj Khosla, would you please raise your virtual hand?
I have a Greg Oldsey with the hand raised.
That's fine. Mr. Oldsey is also with my client.
He's been allowed to speak.
Sir, could you state your name and spell, please, for the court stenographer?
Hi, yes. My name is Greg Oldsey, G-R-E-G, and then O-L-D-S-E-Y.
Right. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Please proceed, counsel.
Thank you. Good morning, Mr. Oldsey.
Have you been present for the entirety of this virtual hearing?
Yes, we have.
And you are Director of Development for Coastal Properties, is that correct?
Correct.
And would you adopt and affirm the testimony that I've offered as your own?
I would, yes.
Thank you very much.
Thank you.
What questions from the board?
Excuse me, Mr. Chairman.
Can you hear me?
Tom, we hear you for the first time and it's wonderful.
Thank you.
I have no questions.
Thank you, Tom.
It's great.
Questions or comments from our attorney, Hillary Emerson?
Not at this time, Mr. Chair.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
I see no hands.
Planning Commission.
Ryan Bednar, City Planning.
Property has fully completed the civic design review process based on the revised plans.
We recommend the request for advance be granted.
Thank you.
MI 2023-002-872-1713 North Front Street.
I vote yes with proviso.
Her amended refusal dated 8-21-23.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes with provisos.
James Snell, my vote is yes with proviso.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes with proviso.
Thank you, counsel.
Thank you, Mr.
Okay, MI 2022-002-908-740-44 South Street. Darlene Treat is the attorney.
We, this is a resumptive hearing. We have a letter of opposition from Councilmember Squilla.
uh we're still waiting for information from the rcos um hillary why don't we start to see if
there's anyone from the rcos present yes i see um as three is present um but yes we could ask
if anyone is present from the rcos to give an update we did not receive a letter good morning
darling good morning all right could you just state your name for the record please
and spell it for the course.
Darlene Threatt on behalf of the applicant.
Darlene, D-A-R-L-E-N-E, Threatt, P as in Thomas, H-R-E-A-T-T, as in Thomas.
You swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Yes, Commissioner.
Is there anyone from the RCOs present?
I see no hands.
if i may commissioner hold on hold on one minute um well go ahead please proceed
hi commissioner this is the second listing of the case i'm not sure whether or not you want
me to make another presentation we did meet with the rco uh two times uh at the first meeting they
had some concerns about the air filtration center we sent them the specifications of our air
filtration center, excuse me, system. These specifications and the filtration system are
recommended by licensing inspections for this type of facility. At the second meeting, they
requested information about the vent. We closed that vent and we
requested information about the vent. We closed that vent and we presented pictures at the last
hearing of the closed vent. They asked us to continue the hearing again last time and we
agreed. It was my understanding that they wanted to walk by the place in the evening and see whether
or not they could smell smells emanating throughout the neighborhood. I'm not sure whether or not they
did that i do know that the head of the south street organization resigned um i don't know if
anybody continued in that effort uh commissioners but what i will say here today is my client i don't
know if you want me to put on a whole case again i will but my client everything from the first
hearing is part of the record my client has uh followed uh every indication by the city before
he picked this location, he contacted the city for a smoking license. The city specifically
designated this property for him to operate his business in. He has updated, which I sent to
Hillary, smoking license, food license, tobacco retailer license. He's in compliance in every
respect. We need the zoning to get the rest of the rental licenses for the property. But this
This is a business that my client has been operating since 2021.
There's been no police incidents, no L&I noise violations, no L&I loitering violations, no L&I smoking violations.
He just updated his indoor smoking license that I sent to Ms. Emerson this morning, and I apologize for that.
When I went over my exhibits this morning, I realized that both those licenses had expired.
I did send an updated food license, and I did send an updated smoking license.
Commissioners, this is how my client feeds his family, and he has taken every single
conceivable step to comply with LNI and to be a good model business in this community.
There have been no incidents whatsoever since he's been operating for the last two and a
a half years, and I would implore you to grant him his special exception. This business has
absolutely no effect on the health, the safety, or welfare of the communities as identified by him
operating for two and a half years and not having any type of incident whatsoever. And this is South
Street. And commissioners, I would like to say, if you can't smoke on South Street in the city
of philadelphia where are you going to smoke it um i'd be happy to do another presentation if that's
what you want no no no but i am requesting that um the special exception be granted okay um hillary
i don't believe we had uh planning take a position yet did we that is correct that is the only other
thing that we need on the record mr planning commission thank you this is uh ron bednar city
planning uh the zoning uh to this parcel was changed from commercial mixed juice one to
commercial mixture 2.5 in 2015 um in a neighborhood zoning map change initiated by the civics the
applicant has shown that the proposed smoking lounge will have no more than more of an impact
and would be expected to have at this location.
City Planning Commission therefore recommends that the board grant the special exception.
MI 2022-002-908-740-44 South Street.
I vote yes with proviso.
Use limited to first floor.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes with proviso.
James Snell, my vote is yes with Proviso.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes with Proviso.
Thank you, counsel.
Thank you very much, Commissioners.
Have a great day.
Number 8, MI 2023-002-981-1828,
Catherine Street, David Orfanides is the attorney.
There's a letter of deferral from the South of South Neighborhood Association.
Mr. Orphanides.
He's become a panelist, sir.
Good morning, Mr. Orphanides. Could you state your name, please, and spell it for the court stenographer?
Could you state your name, please, and spell it for the courts tonight?
Yes, my name is David Orphanides. Last name is spelled 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, sir.
Could you identify your client, the relationship to this property?
Yes, my client is Basecamp, B-A-S-E-C-A-M-P, Property Group, LLC, and they are the owner of the subject premises.
Our vice chair has just a few questions, sir.
Good morning, counsel. Do you agree to leave the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
I have emailed them all the required documents and exhibits that is needed and required to proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing.
i submitted everything except for the posting photographs i did not include them on
last week when i sent in and i sent them in on monday but the property wasn't properly posted
thank you please proceed
okay can everybody see my screen we can great yeah again my name is david orphanetes um here
with the law firm of orphanetes and toner here in philadelphia um and again i'm representing
Base Camp Property Group, LLC. You have up on your screen a photograph of the subject property,
1828 Catherine Street. It's a three-story structure that, as you can see here from the
aerial images that I have at tab three, is located in the Graduate Hospital section of Philadelphia
between South Street and Washington Avenue to the west of Grodd Street. Zooming in,
you can see a closer up image of my client's property. We back up to Webster Street, the
1700 block of Webster Street. We are on the south side of Catherine Street, and we back up the
properties on the north side of Webster Street, which is a dead-end street here. There is an alley
running between our property and the properties to the south of us. As you can see, the block
consists of rows on the south side of the block and you can also see what was on the north side
of the block which is also row homes um our property is owned rm1 you can see right here
this is a tab four it's uh that's residential multi-family uh we are located across the street
from RSA 5 properties and we back up the properties that are RSA 5. That's important
because you will see in a couple minutes regarding the use of the properties on our block.
At tab 5 I have other images of our of our photographs of our block you can see
up and down Catherine Street and as I indicated when we were going through the aerial images
series of row homes. Interior photographs. This property is presently, let me back up for a
second. The property is presently zoned as a two-family dwelling. It has been a two-family
dwelling rental property since 1983. We are between two other properties, obviously 1828
or 1826 and 1830. 1826 that you saw in the photographs that I took is also a three-story
row home. That has been a two-family rental since 2004. And then abutting us that you also saw in
the photographs to the west of us at 1830 Catherine Street is a two-family rental that has been
that since 2001 the property directly behind us 1831 webster street is a single family
but it was granted dimension dimensional variances by the zoning board in 2009 so our property has
been a duplex a rental property since 1983 and so to get back to the interior photos
you can see here this is the ground floor unit fully furnished
and I think
you might agree it is very nicely
appointed
there is outdoor space for the ground floor
unit on an enclosed rear yard
and then the second floor unit
or the upper unit
also you can see
very nicely appointed
and they have a deck the floor plans you can see the cellar first floor and part of the second
floor makes up the uh the lower unit that is two bedrooms and then the upper unit is also
And then the upper unit is also two bedrooms.
two bedrooms that deck is off the back of the third
That deck is off the back of the third floor.
I love it.
It's not a rooftop deck.
As I indicated, we've included at tab nine, the zoning archives for the budding properties to either side of us, 1826 and 1830 Catherine Streets, tab 9A and tab 9B.
as well as showing their two-family use, as well as the zoning archives for 1831 Webster behind us that had, as I indicated, variances granted by the zoning board,
reliefs granted by the zoning board for dimensional variances.
In 9D, I include the OPA information and zoning archives for the other properties on the 1800 block of Catherine Street.
I bring that up because at the present time, while there are 21 properties that front on our side of Catherine Street on our block, 21 properties, 14 of those are presently utilized as rental properties.
some a couple or one family units more than that are two or three family units in addition the
four properties directly across the street from us the front on the that are on the north side
of catherine street those four properties across the street from us two of those are rental
properties two of them are not i bring that up because again our application here is for use of
the property as an Airbnb, which under the current zoning code is deemed visitor accommodations.
At tab 10, I have a map showing the nearest hotels available presently for people that
are either living or hosting, having guests, having visitors. Come see them. You can see most
of those are up towards the Rittenhouse Square area and then you have a one further to the east
so pretty far away and then you obviously get hotels on Market Street and John Kennedy Boulevard
it was interesting at one of our meetings the first meeting we've had three community group
meetings scheduled in this matter one of the people in the audience brought up that there
There used to be – and this was actually from the Green Book, the famous Green Book – that there used to be places in our neighborhood – and I say our because I live in this neighborhood.
I live three blocks from this property.
By the way, the owners of this property live four blocks away.
They're on the 1700 block of Carpenter Street, so they live very close to the subject premises.
But you can see when you plot these out, here's 1828 Catherine Street here in pink, that there used to be places for people to stay in our neighborhood.
And that is gone largely by the wayside by, you know, for one reason or the other.
And you can see here the overlay of what used to be and where presently those places there are for people to stay close to our neighborhood.
a copy of our appeal at tab 11 and our project information form the hearing notice for today's
hearing is at tab 12 the posting photographs i imagine i mentioned earlier at tab 13
d to tab 14 showing my clients are the owners of the property at tab 14 our tax clearance tab 15
And then the 14303 notices that for three meetings that we had scheduled with SOSNA, two that actually went off that were held, the first one and the third one.
And again, I want to reiterate to the board that this is a multifamily block. As many multifamily blocks on our side, as many multifamily blocks are, many of those properties, obviously, as I indicated, over half have a history of rental licenses or have owners who do have mailing addresses that are not the subject premises.
And so, again, we come up with a number of 14 on the block out of the 21 homes that are not owner-occupied, that are rental properties.
My clients live in the neighborhood a couple blocks away, as I mentioned.
If I go back to the initial aerial, here's the subject property.
My clients live down on this block of Carpenter Street, so very close walking distance to the property.
They check on their property.
they're there at the property very regularly. They have somebody that helps them manage the
property. I've seen him walking on this block, walking around the neighborhood to a variety of
I've seen him walking on this block, walking around the neighborhood to a variety of different properties when I've left my house in the neighborhood.
So they're very active, very involved.
We mentioned at the community group meeting, our clients are very involved.
My clients are very involved in the community.
They actually offer a discount rate to those people that live in the community, have a need for temporary accommodations such as these.
That was something that was spoken to on behalf of my clients by a number of members of the community at the community group meeting.
And we feel that given the lack of availability of short-term rentals, short-term accommodations for people in this neighborhood, the need to go many blocks away in order to find that we meet the criteria for the granting of variance here.
We will not be causing any additional congestion in the streets, no additional traffic.
There's no additional impact on air and light to abutting properties as there are no changes to the existing building proposed.
There's no signage proposed with this building.
Although I will say that as part of the proceedings with SOSNA, we were tasked or we offered to try to develop a community benefit agreement to provide to SOSNA to provide protections and ensure good operations at this property and as well as other properties that SOSNA chose to use them.
And they included things that providing a small plaque at the property, identifying who the owner is and what their way to contact them if there is a need to do so.
There are probably about 15 or 16 things we provided to in the community benefit agreement.
Unfortunately, that wasn't something that we were able to enter into with SASNA.
They ultimately elected not to go that route, but it's something that my client remains committed to as a member of the community to providing benefits to the community, whether it's in rating or otherwise.
And for those reasons, we request that the zoning board grant this variance.
I know I've had a couple of these in front of the board.
I heard one earlier today down in Point Breeze, just to the south of us by a couple blocks over on the other side of Washington Avenue.
And obviously, given the kind of developing aspect of this use in the city of Philadelphia, the way that the city is working to regulate these uses, my clients would be open to a temporary if that's something that the board finds warranted here.
With that, I would ask my clients to identify themselves.
Yes, TIGA should be on right now and to adopt my statements.
mr orphanetes this is for both units am i correct yes this is for both okay thank you
hi hi could you state your name please and spell for the court stenographer sure i'll give you the
full name is yisrael tg which is y-i-s-r-a-e-l and the last name is tg which is spelled t-i-g-a-y
you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth
i do please proceed counsel good morning yes um can you please identify good morning could you
please identify your relationship to the owner of the base uh the property base camp properties
uh yeah i am a uh owner of of base camp so thank you and um you real quickly you heard the
statements that I made to the zoning board today? I did. And they true and correct to the best of
your knowledge? They are. And would you adopt them as your own? I do. And then real quickly,
ask you a few questions as well. I'm pulling up photographs that show the interior of the
property. This is the interior you design and provide here at this property. And this is the
current state of the units as I've shown them? It is. Yes. Okay. And it looks like you went to
great ends to make very, very nice and very high end, pleasant accommodations here.
Is that correct?
That is correct.
And you heard me state that you live in the neighborhood.
That's correct?
It is.
And a little bit, can you please tell the board a little bit about how you and your
wife operate this Airbnb?
Absolutely.
So we have a close friend who manages it.
He's a professional manager of Airbnb or of the Airbnbs and others like it.
That's what he does professionally.
And so we work hand in hand with him in order to ensure one.
We work hand in hand with him in order to ensure, one, that the properties are kept up very well.
So he manages all of the physical aspects of it, including making sure it's clean, trash removal, as well as a communication with the guests, which is also a big part of how we make sure that we run this thing well,
Well, because we make sure that the guests that we have using the ratings that are in the Airbnb tool, we're able to ensure that the guests that we have are extremely high quality.
And so we only take people that are that fit certain parameters.
The most important one, of course, is the reviews and ratings they have.
And that has been incredibly effective at actually getting really good people.
we would make the argument that it's actually considerably better than our ability to manage
for rental properties that are not short-term because you don't really have sort of crowdsourced
ratings and so the people that we've had staying over the course of already you know a considerable
amount of time have been um one uh very uh pleasant for anybody that is um you know interacts
with them no noise complaints and that kind of thing um from our end it's been shocking how well
these properties have been maintained physically i think we've maybe changed one rug so the actual
um interiors and exteriors of this place because people are so concerned with the ratings that
they have on these uh on these tools like airbnb um they actually maintain the properties
considerably more than um than renters so we've been extremely pleasantly supplied surprised by
that and we go to great lengths um to make sure that uh everybody that stays there really fits
that criteria. And yes, when we went to SOSNA, we stated to them that based upon the review of
your records and your manager's records, property manager's records, that the units, each of these
units only get rented out, rented, let out, reserved about half of the nights out of every
month is that is that correct when you average them out yeah i think we came out around about
14 between 14 and 16 nights out of the month so half of the month these units for each of these
units they're they're vacant they're not even occupied is that correct um yeah i mean i don't
know the exact numbers but roughly speaking that's right yeah okay all right i have no further
questions for uh for yes and i have no other witnesses um at the present thank you questions
from the board no mr chairman no chair no chair why should your comments from our attorney hillary
emerson not at this time mr chair why should your comments from the virtual audience
um yes mr chair i have a hand raised from a casey deegan i've allowed them to speak
Good morning. Could you state your name, please, and spell for the court's sonography?
Sure. My name is Casey Deegan, C-A-S-E-Y-D-E-G-E-N.
Right. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Are you a neighbor?
Okay. Please proceed.
Okay. So I live at 1830 Catherine, which abuts the property in question, and I live here with my husband and my two young daughters.
We have lived here for the duration of the time that it has been done by the T-Gays.
And we really have not had any issues at all, with the exception of one occasion where there was some trash left.
And I was able to get in touch with the owners right away.
And following that, they actually arranged for daily trash pickups.
So since then, it has not been an issue.
And the renders have really been respectful and friendly.
The units are not used for parties.
And I can guarantee that as someone very invested in my children sleeping through the night, I would tell you if that was not the case.
And additionally, as Mr. Orphanides mentioned, the nearest place for people to stay is Rittenhouse.
And due to the small nature of many of the homes in the area, many of us just don't have the space to accommodate visitors from out of town.
And so my own family has personally stayed next door and the TKs have been accommodating and offered us a discount rate, as previously mentioned.
And I really believe this is a service to the neighborhood and that these are responsible owners.
Of course, we know there's a spectrum of owners and how the properties are managed, but we would really ask that you support this property and its current use.
Thank you very much for taking the time to call us.
We appreciate your input.
Is there anyone else in the virtual audience?
um yes mr chair uh sonia paris with their hand raised i've allowed them to speak at this time
Yes, Mr. Chair.
hi could you state your name please and spell for the court stenographer
sonia paris please unmute
good morning
Once more, Sonya Paris, excuse me.
Jason and Nohan, are they?
No, they might have been having trouble unmuting, sir.
I have another hand up from Matthew Katz.
I would love them to speak.
Hi, could you state your name, please, and spell for the court stenographer?
Yes. Matthew Katz, K-A-T-Z.
Right. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Yes, sir.
Are you a neighbor?
I am, yes. I live at 2,000 block of Fitzwater Street, which is around the corner from one of the units.
And I'm familiar with these rentals, familiar with these Airbnb properties.
And I just wanted to note how much of a value they are to the community, given the fact that there are no hotels, motels in the neighborhood and certainly no affordable accommodations, temporary accommodations anywhere in the center city area.
And there's a history of these places existing in the community. There's a green book which showed where African-Americans were able to stay back in the day.
And there were many on this very block, short-term inns that were used as temporary accommodations for decades in this neighborhood.
And we need them back and believe that these properties are of absolute value, not only to visiting family and relatives, but also to families that are in town to treat their children a chop.
I know these properties have been used to house families who need temporary accommodations while their children are undergoing treatment.
So I hope they're given an accommodation.
Thank you.
Thank you very much, Mr. Katz, for your call in.
Is there anyone else?
No further hints, Mr. Chair.
Planning, Commission.
This is Ron Bednar, City Planning.
Comprehensive plan recommends no change to the existing zoning at this location.
The appellant has not shown that the property cannot possibly be used in strict conformity with the zoning code, and that a variance is therefore necessary to enable an economic use of the property.
Therefore, City Planning Commission recommends the zoning board deny the variance.
Thank you.
MI 2023, 002-981-1828, Catherine Street.
I vote yes.
Temporary variance expires 12-15-26 for both units.
Thomas Holliman, my vote is yes with proviso for both units.
James Snell, my vote is yes with proviso.
Ishmael Shahid, my vote is yes with proviso.
Thank you, counsel.
Thank you.
May be excused.
You can, sir. Number 10, MI 2023-004-329-7135 Caster Avenue. There is a letter of opposition from Take Back, your neighborhood. There is a petition, though, signed by 19 neighbors, five of which are in the 7100 block of Caster Avenue.
Mr. Chair, Mr. Zin Jin has been promoted to your panelists.
Good morning, counsel. Could you state your name, please, and spell for the court stenographer?
Good morning.
Good morning, sir. Could you state your name, please, and spell for the court stenographer?
Yes. My name is Zen Jin, Z-H-E-N, last name J-I-N, 1617 John F. Kennedy Boulevard, Suite 1838,
Philadelphia PA 19103
here on behalf of the applicant.
Am I, I'm
sorry, sir. Do you swear or affirm
to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
I do. Could you identify
your client, the relationship to this property?
Yes, my client
is Mr. Junhao Zhu,
J-U-N-H-A-O
Z-H-U is the last name, the owner of the property.
is the last name, the owner of the property.
And our vice chair
And our vice chair has just a few questions.
Good morning, counsel.
Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal or stipulate to his acquisition?
Have you emailed them all the required documents and exhibits that is needed and required to proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing?
Yes. In addition, we also sent in some additional photographs as a supplemental exhibit yesterday.
I'm sorry, two days ago.
Thank you. Please proceed and share your screen.
Chair, can you check your message?
I'm going to share with the board the latest exhibit.
If the board wants to see the previous exhibit to see the differences, I'm happy to share that as well.
However, the latest exhibit contains some additional photographs, which I think helps better understand the application before us.
So this is an application for use of the property as a two-family dwelling.
It is essentially a legalization request.
My client purchased the property, and this property is located on a block that is zoned RSA 5.
However, both when we did the petition and also looking at the history of the block itself, some of that history is attached for the board's reference in this exhibit package.
The property, despite what the RCO claims, is not a single-family house.
It was set up as a multi-family, not multi, but two-family dwelling, very similar and almost identical in structure to many of the properties on the block.
In fact, what we found was when we did a quick search of the listing itself, the listing was in fact listed as a two family, not a single.
So number of units was two even on the listing when he purchased it.
While we understand this doesn't reflect reality many times, it kind of goes against the RCO's claim that my client bought the property knowing or bought it with the intent that it is only a single family.
My client also actually owns a property on this block already that is a two-family that
is structured identical.
That's part of the reason he bought this property, thinking it is a two-family.
In addition, 7145, two-unit rental license.
7147, two-unit rental license.
7143, two-unit rental license.
Part of the reason so many neighbors signed our petition was because they were well aware
that this block contains mostly duplex properties, and they were this way before.
The seller of the property actually only pulled a license for a single family before selling,
partly because from our understanding that he had family members living in one of the
units and he himself living in the unit, so he didn't need two rental licenses to maintain
the rental of the one unit.
And that's really why we ended up, when my client bought the property, thinking that it is a two-family and went to get his rental licenses, he was refused the rental license, saying that there has only been one rental license on file.
And therefore, RSA 5, single rental license, this is a single-family house.
Now, looking at the property, all the properties on the block look very similar to this.
they do have the single entrance in the front. However, this property already has two exits in
the back, and these are not newly installed. They've been there. One leads to the second
floor. One leads into the rear of the basement or first floor. The unit has been cleaned up
prior to sale. It was painted. There are new flooring. So we're not denying that it was
updated but structurally there's no work done to the property you can see from certain photos i'm
going to try to get to right here i'm going to zoom in on this photo because it's important for
the board to see the age of these units these heating units and water heater units are not new
that that was not replaced by the seller when the property was purchased and as you can see these
are in place for some time. These are two heaters, two water heaters. The washer and dryers are
marked as one and two as well. All these were existing conditions when my client went in and
purchased the property. From the layout standpoint as well, the property is laid out already as a
duplex. The entryway has a foyer. This is actually similar to another property that he owns and also
similar to the neighboring properties when we went to do the petition you can see that when the front
door is opened generally there's a foyer with the stairway going up stairway going down a little
generally there's a foyer with the stairway going up stairway going down a little hallway that leads
hallway that
around to the door to the first unit and then the stairs up will lead to the upper floor or the
second unit and here is the rear side access to allow entry into the garage and separately into
the shared washer and dryer units trash storage areas each of these floors is basically a two
bedroom unit with its own kitchen and living area. So while we understand the community's
position that it is RSA 5 and that they believe that it is a single-family property,
we disagree that it was historically such. The information we have of the neighboring properties,
the petitions that were signed and feedback from those people who signed the petition,
as well as information from rental license nearby
shows that this is in fact a block full of two family dwellings
and many of them have been this way for many, many years.
So we're asking for the board to favorable review of this application
and allow the legalization of the two units in this property.
I'm happy to answer any additional questions
or direct to any part of the exhibits.
And my client should be here to verify my testimony.
Why don't we bring your client on, sir?
Sure. He goes by Raymond as his English name. Raymond, can you raise your hand and be identified virtually?
I'm going to have to speak.
Good morning, sir. Could you state your name and spell it, please, for the court stenographer?
Yes. My name is Jun Hao Zhu, J-U-N-H-A-O. Last name is Z-H-U.
Right. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Please proceed, counsel.
Thank you. Raymond, you saw my presentation and heard the testimony I gave to the zoning board?
Yes. Can you verify that what I have represented is true and correct and adopted as your own
testimony? It is true and correct, yes, and I will adopt it as my testimony. Thank you.
Questions from the board? No, Mr. Chairman. No, Chair.
Questions or comments from our attorney, Hillary Amberson?
not at this time mr chair questions or comments from the virtual audience
i do not see any further hand yes mr chair planning commission uh ron bednar city plan
uh the property is indicated for residential use on the city plan given the physical
conditions of the site and its um use history we recommend of course thank you
MI 2023-004-329-7135 Caster Avenue.
I vote yes.
James Snell, my vote is yes.
Mr. Holloman?
we lost some chair i'm not able to see him on the phone all right so hillary uh ish got off
the phone a minute we're gonna have to hold this vote am i correct we're just gonna have to until
we have mr holliman back just pause hearings period so we have our quorum all right i'm happy
to wait for mr holliman for a bit um chair um let me see where he's at
excuse me mr chairman can you hear me now
excuse me mr chairman we can't we can't tom we need a we need your vote on this matter
okay i didn't hear what okay um okay so so it's 71 35 caster avenue it's uh a duplex
planning is in favor of it i voted yes mr snell voted yes thomas holliman my vote is yes
thank you counsel thank you all right hey tom just so you know uh ish had a step off the phone
so the next one could you do the follow-up for me too please no no problem all right so mi2023
002 907 2914 west gerada avenue vernon anastasio is the attorney
There's no letter from an RCO, but there was a meeting held on 12-7-23.
there's no letter from an
There's also a letter of support from the Lower North Philadelphia Community Development Corporation.
Excuse me, Mr. Chair. Mr. Harry Cook will be promoted as a panelist. He'll be coming back in soon.
Yes, Mr. Chair.
I believe Mr. Anastasia is out of town right now, so the case is marked for him.
Mr. Cook will be handling.
Good morning, Mr. Cook.
Could you state your name, please, and spell for the court stenographer?
Yes, good morning, Mr. Chairman.
Harry Cook, H-A-R-R-Y-C-O-O-K.
Let me get my camera going.
All right, good.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
I do, Mr. Chairman.
And as a point of order, I have two legalization cases with a community support very similar to each other in context that I think will go quickly.
We do have a letter of support for the incident.
For 2914?
We do, from Fairmount Civic Association.
21 in favor, zero opposed.
All right.
Our vice chair has just a few questions for you, sir.
Not our vice chair.
Board Member Holliman.
Good afternoon, counsel.
Good afternoon, Mr. Holliman.
Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to his accuracy?
Yes, I do, sir.
Did you email all of the exhibits and documents as required five days in advance of this hearing?
Yes, we did, sir.
Thank you.
Please proceed and share your screen.
Thank you.
So, Mr. Chairman, members of the board, I'm here presenting on behalf of Fairmount Community
Development Corporation. They are the applicant here at 2914 West Girard Avenue. Their intent
is to operate their community development corporation on the first floor, host community
meetings, serve as an entrepreneur incubator. They are a well-established CDC in the neighborhood,
and this will be a new location for them. They purchased the subject property in the spring of
2023. They inherited two tenants in the second and third floor units. The first floor was a
daycare center. Most recently, this board granted use in 2015 for a daycare center,
residential on the second floor, and vacant residential on the third floor.
My clients went to apply for rental licenses as good citizens, and they were told that the
uses were not in order any longer. So I want to start with just an overlay.
The subject property is outlined in blue. This is from Atlas. As you can see, we are right on
Girard Avenue. There is commercial mixed use on the block at the end caps, and we are adjacent
to RM1. This property, as far back as 1948, was a three-unit apartment. So we have a pre-existing
non-conforming structure that is incongruent with RSA 5, no matter how you cut it, whichever uses
are there. I'll get to the plans in a little bit. We're not planning any changes except
to the meeting space on the first floor,
but I want to just give you an idea of photos.
So previously, Morgan's Preparatory Academy
was located here on the first floor.
It's a very nice, well-maintained building.
The second floor and third floor
have long-term tenants in it.
This is a shot of the block.
And again, this is the 2,900 block of Girard,
which is a main thoroughfare.
very well maintained and clean out front these pictures are recent no work is being engaged in
in the property this is the access to the second floor this is all throughout the first floor
commercial space pictures are going to be pretty redundant and for the sake of time they are in the
binder if uh the board wants me to go up to the uh up to the uh plans i can do that or down to
the letter of support uh for the sake of brevity letter support why don't you go to a letter okay
so letter of support in just a moment
We met with Fairmount Civic Association last week. It was a very well-attended meeting.
we met with
There were 21 people in attendance, only one affected neighbor. However, all 21 members voted
in support. 22 members voted in support of this. So it's not a non-opposition. It is a support
case. And here we have their position was the RSA single family zoning does not reflect
the historic configuration and use of the property. Gerrard Avenue is a major arterial
zone commercial or multifamily in this neighborhood, except for this block on the
south side of Gerrard Avenue. If you do look on Atlas at the overhead, you will see that this
block and the next block are the only two that don't have the zoning designation that would
allow for this by right. The proposed uses would not be out of character for the neighborhood,
would not impose excessive noise or disturbance on the neighbors. And that came from Teresa
Holberg. She did send it over to the board, I believe on Monday, and here it is. I can resend
it if Ms. Emerson doesn't have a copy. As for housekeeping, prior to the meeting, we sent out
a notice to the community. And that went out to 126 addresses provided to us by the Planning
Commission. And this was the notification that allowed for engagement at the meeting and
instructions on how to join this meeting today. So, you know, to summarize, this is a longstanding
pre-existing non-conforming structure. It has a longstanding pre-existing non-conforming use.
We're essentially here just to change one commercial use to a less intensive commercial use and retain the two pre-existing two-family above unit on the second floor, unit on the third floor.
You have a representative from the Community Development Corporation?
I do. I have Patrick Sherlock here, who is the executive director.
And we'd like to adopt.
Mr. Sherlock, could you please raise your hand?
Hello, I'm here.
Hi, could you state your name, please, and spell for the court sonographer?
My name is Patrick Sherlock. First name is P-A-T-R-I-C-K. Last name S-H-E-R-L-O-C-K.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Please proceed, counsel.
Thank you, Chairman.
Mr. Sherlock, did you see and hear my presentation to the board today?
Was it true and correct to the best of your knowledge and information?
Do you adopt it as your own testimony?
Thank you.
Questions from the board?
No, Mr. Chairman.
No, Chair.
Questions or comments from our attorney, Hillary Ramerson?
Just briefly, Mr. Chair, Mr. Cook, we didn't receive a copy of that letter, so if you could forward it, that would be great.
Absolutely.
Thank you so much.
Thank you. Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
I do not see any further hands Mr. Chair. Cleaning Commission.
This property is indicated for residential use on the city plan or adopted district
plan recommends no change the existing 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 reverting back to being used in conformity with the code
requirements therefore we recommend the place of parents not be rented
mr chairman if i may respond uh with some legal argument on that um we've presented a property
that has been demised as three units for at least seven decades. Under the case law, it is a
presumptive hardship to have to spend money to bring a non-compliant property into compliance.
Along with that, I think the current consistent use, the support of the neighborhood,
including the coordinating RCO, which has best position to understand best uses for that block.
We ask that you consider and give appropriate weight accordingly.
May 2023, 002-907-2914 Western Avenue. I vote yes.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes.
james snell my vote is yes um mr cook could you please stay on yes thank you okay let's see here
Yes. Thank you.
Okay, let's see here.
At number 17, MI 2023, 002-902-804 West Wingahawken Street.
There is a letter of non-opposition from Esperanza, and there's a letter of non-opposition from Council Member Lozada.
And just for the record, Mr. Cook, just state your name.
You've already been sworn.
Harry Cook, again, the law office of Vernon Anastasio on behalf of applicant.
And could you identify your client and their relationship to the property?
I sure can.
Ms. Ortiz, are you present or do you want me to just?
All you have to do is tell me who your clients are.
i just um just a moment there's two two clients so it is uh yates ortiz and nathan nazaro
her son okay and and then our vice chair our vice chair has a few questions
not our vice chair our board member mr holland good morning counselor do you agree do you agree
to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to his accuracy did you did you email all of the
exhibits and documents as required five days in advance to this hearing yes sir thank you
please proceed your screen is up thank you uh mr chairman members of the board uh i am here
presenting 804 wing the hawking street before i get into my presentation i want to provide you
with a little overview and context for the property.
As you can see, this property is located near Hunting Park
with access to Roosevelt Boulevard.
The property itself is in the RSA 3 zoning district.
However, this block face in particular,
each one of these properties, according to historic records and access,
are multi-use with the exception of a record missing for this property, as well as 802
Wingahawken. 801, 800 Wingahawken is a CMX1. It is a bar restaurant with one unit above.
806 Wingahawken is a duplex. 808 Wingahawken is a duplex. And 810 Wingahawken is a duplex.
As to the missing Hanson file for this property and the other property, it could be a matter of when the early 2000 scanning project, it never made it in to the system.
When my clients purchased this property in 2015, it was a two unit.
They've made no changes to the demising walls.
It was consistent with every other unit on the block face.
In addition to that, this particular block, as I refresh to bring up the zoning overview of it, is a mixed block where the square block to the left side,
it's I'm having some technical issue there here we go is RM1
all the way down RSA3 here and CMX on the corner and again historically this block face on Wingo
Hawking as it goes to the park as it goes to Roosevelt Boulevard has been de facto multi-family
So that's a bit of the background on this particular property as it relates to historic
kind of site information.
As we go into the property, the first floor has a common entry, step upstairs, and you
have a kitchen and a single bedroom.
There's access to the basement.
The second floor apartment is a two-bedroom.
Again, no demising changes have been made to the property.
My client has made some aesthetic upgrades, but no changes structurally to the demising walls of the property.
Here are some photos of the property as they've upgraded it.
It's very lovely.
Consistent with stairs.
with the rest of the block face. There's a lot of photos. There is replacement material in here.
material in here and they went to
great effort to make this aesthetically pleasing
obviously this property cannot get a co uh without uh the zoning approval at this point
um so on and so forth you can review the photos in the record
i'll take you to the community meeting letter and some of the housekeeping items
as you can see it is beautifully appointed
we sent out our letter on the 29th of september to the addresses provided for by the planning
commission has scrolled through above it provided information about the refusal
the legalization how to engage at that meeting via zoom and how to attend this meeting
Esperanza Housing and Economic Development reviewed the block, reviewed the adjacent use histories, and thought this was an appropriate use on this block and was an excellent example of the type of property that should be present and the use for this block.
So we have two letters of non-opposition, one from Esperanza Housing and Economic Development and one from the council person's office.
And here is our proof of mailing. I have Ms. Ortiz here. If she could raise her hand and adopt, that would be great.
Ms. Ortiz, good to speak.
Good morning. Could you please state your name and spell for the court stenographer?
Good morning. My name is Jayisa Ortiz and it's Y-A-I-T-Z-A-O-R-T-I-Z.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
You see, Mr. Cook.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Ms. Ortiz, did you hear and see my presentation to the zoning board this morning?
Was it true and accurate to the best of your knowledge and understanding?
Do you adopt it as your own testimony?
Thank you.
Questions from the board?
no mr chairman no chair questions or comments from our attorney hillary emerson
not at this time mr chair questions or comments from the virtual audience
i do not take any hands mr chair planning commission i run bednar city planning
the property is indicated for residential use on the city plan given the physical circumstances
is the site we recommend the request for variance be granted uh provided no off-street parking
required my 2023 002 902 804 west wing hockton street i vote yes thomas holliman my vote is yes
James Snell, my vote is yes
Thank you, Mr. Cook
Thank you, I'll see you this afternoon
Thank you
Is there anyone in the virtual audience
who has
had a 9.30
case that has not been called?
I did not see any hands, Mr. Chair
Thanks everyone
See everyone at 2pm
Appreciate it
Thank you.
Good. Thank you.
Good afternoon. My name is Bill Bergman, and I will be chairing this afternoon's EBA hearing.
With me is our Vice Chair, Ismail Shahid. He's coming on right now.
Thomas Holliman, our board member.
Present, Mr. Chairman.
And James Snell, our board member.
Present, Mr. Chairman.
Also present is Hillary Emerson, our attorney, and our Executive Director, Tanya Sunken.
Here's our virtual format. Be advised the proceedings are being recorded.
Recording in progress.
Present Mr. Chairman.
I hear you.
The video will be available by contacting tonyasunkett at phil.gov.
For the benefit of our court stenography, 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.
To enter an appearance statement, call 267-270-554.
To enter an appearance statement, call 267-270-5548.
Leave your email and the address to the property in question.
And finally, the question answer box on the screen is not for comments or testament.
All comments should be directed to our executive director, Tanya Sunken.
Let's look at this afternoon's schedule.
Number four, MI 2023-005-133-7918 Artley Street.
That case is continued.
Number five, MI 2023-003-241-1607-09 Ridge Avenue.
This case was listed in error.
It has already been cited by the board.
And number 14.
MI 2023-002-231-3020-North 20th Street, this case has been continued, Attorney Moving Party.
Are there any questions relative to the cases that have been continued?
good afternoon mr chair this is jason hand once again i will be your calls for today
thank you i do not see any hands raised all right are there any other requests for continuance
again i do not wait a minute mr chair i have a dietrich rose with their hand raised i have
Not them to speak.
Hi, could you state your name and spell, please, for the court stenographer?
My name is Dietrich Rose, D-I-E-T-R-I-C-H, last name Rose, like the flower, S-R-O-S-E.
And, sir, your case is 3538 Calumet Street?
That's correct.
So we have no exhibits as of yet, and this is the first listing.
Do you want a continuance?
All right.
So I'm going to give you a continuance, but the case has to be heard the next time, okay?
All right.
So MI 2023-005-120, 3538 Cal and Met Street.
This case is a continued mark must be tried.
Thank you for calling in.
We appreciate it.
Thank you.
We're going to go to our add-on list.
I'll be with you in one minute.
Here's our add-on list.
Number one, MI 2023-001-536-6109 Market Street.
This is a request of reconsideration.
I vote yes to reconsideration and rehearing.
Thomas Holliman, I vote yes to rehearing and reconsideration.
James Snell, I vote yes to reconsideration and rehearing.
re-hearing. Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes to reconsideration and re-hearing. Number two, MI 2022
006-822, 2521 Jefferson Street. The vote on this matter has been rescheduled to Wednesday,
December 20th at 2 p.m.
Number three, MI 2023, 004-552-4613 Newell Street, I vote yes, Proviso.
Approved use is libraries and culture exhibits only, no household living.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes, with Proviso.
James Snell, my vote is yes with proviso
Ishmael Shahid, my vote is yes with proviso
Thank you, and we're going to go to our first case
which is number 11, it's a pro se case
MI 2023, 005-359-118 Carpenter Street
Vincent Cerise and Tricia Pompilo
letter of support from the Queen Village Neighbors Association
Letter of non-opposition from Council Member Squill.
From Council Member Squill.
Trisha.
I'm sorry to interrupt you, but it seems Bart Levy has his hand raised.
Bart Levy?
I'm speaking.
He's been allowed to speak.
Mr. Levy, state your name, please, and spell it for the court stenographer.
Bart Levy, B-A-R-T-L-E-V-Y.
right do you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth
yes sir jim okay sir uh it's 23 002957 i missed my sound was off for the first cases that you read
and i wanted to make sure that that was not continued
um no i don't that matter was not continued mr chair it's not not continued thank you i thank
the chair all right good all right so tricia pompillo pompilio i'm sorry
do we see your hand they'll be rejoining oh great thank you
tricia pompilio hi please um hi could you state your name please and spell for the court stenographer
yes sorry just got it to work okay um i'm tricia tricia pompilio uh you said spell it t-r-i-t-r-i-c-i-a
last name pompilio p as in peter o m as in mary p as in peter i l i o sorry
okay i'm back uh great great do you swear or firm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but
the truth yes i do okay so this application is for the erection of a three-story front edition
with one existing off-street parking space access from carpenter street to remain and the
replacement of an existing rear one-story edition the proposed construction would result in the
structured exceeding the maximum occupied area in the RCO zoning district. 75% allowed, and this
is 85% proposed. Our vice chair has just a few questions before you testify, okay? Okay.
Good afternoon, 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 is needed and
required to proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing yes yes thank you
please proceed to share your screen okay okay don't you as counsel for a second apologize
um green button at the bottom okay here you go did i do it okay you did it you did it
oh my god okay um so this is our this is my name is risha pompilio um i'm the owner along with my
husband uh vince sabarese of 118 carpenter street um we've have a three-story dwelling
on carpenter street we've lived here since 2006 um we have three girls that we've raised here and
we'd like to continue to raise here they're getting bigger um we were here today to request
of variance because we have a three-story, we want to do a three-story addition at the
front of the house for an enclosed garage at level one and expand the living spaces on levels two and
three. We greatly think this would be great for our family by enclosing, we have an existing
driveway, it's open by having a garage there and then bringing the house all the way up in the
front um the existing home was built in the 70s and it contains three stories of a living area
plus a kitchen and mechanicals in the cellar um in the back there's an existing one story
bay window why don't why don't why don't we do this why don't you go through your documents
i see you have them listed there you can go through the ones we know all about it
and then wind up with pictures and draw or drawings could you do that i'm happy to do that
Okay. So we start with number one. We're good with that. We have that. Okay, good. Let's see. Here's our application for appeal. We have that. We're good. Okay. Here's the, got that. Okay. We're booming. This is a deed. Your deed. We know you own it.
this is a deed your deed we know you own it okay excellent doing good um you know this is a tax
certificate here's the me representing my husband we had to notarize this letter because he had to
work today um and here's the drawings i think i have to zoom can you let's see is that better if
i sort of why don't you zoom in let's see what it looks like in well let's see the whole thing first
You can go and show us what you want to show us.
I'm not good at this, but I'm going to try.
So here's our house right here.
The light gray is what is already here with an open driveway here that extends about halfway.
There's like, it's covered about halfway over the driveway.
And that's where our rooms are built upon the second and third floor.
And we propose to do, to modify where the dark gray is.
so that's the addition you can see it it meets up with the current neighbor's house it's going
to just go out to the street um we're actually leaving um a chunk of it open on the on the right
hand side over here um i don't know if this view helps you can kind of see you have open here so
you're stepping in um putting a little entry that's an entryway there am i right yeah it's
going to be like all the way to the front though so we kind of be more open um to to take the weight
off and just make it look more you know open in that to that alley so here's a sort of drawings
here right okay here's what it looks like now so as you can see okay okay yep so you're you're
going to go above build an addition above that right you're coming out yeah we're going to come
out to match where the neighbor's house is they have the same house as us but yeah yeah okay so
exactly so you're basically going to match what's next door correct yeah yeah a little lighter in
the front because we're leaving a little bit more open space than they have but um yes and we're
next to this we share this backyard area with our neighbors um who all support the project um and
this will be we'll have a window over here so we could see you know people walking you know from
the right over here do i do anyone want to see the pictures more closely or how how are we with
those i think we're understanding it and you had to post it in the back too did i have the the
the property you posted the property that's the front okay i see it yep yep okay okay
and this is from the neighborhood the meeting supporting us that's the queen village neighbors
association right yes and my um i think that oh wait this is the letter we sent them i'm sorry
this is the letters we sent out to all the neighbors okay and all the surrounding people
with about the queen village hearing that we had so you can see all the addresses blah blah blah
um and this was the uh unanimous approval from the board um including my neighbor who's right
next door to me who is very excited with this project the one the one next door to you is the
one you're going to go out as far as right yes yeah okay all right and then you have a letter
from the councilman and then yes uh is that in here i think it's not we have it councilman school
yeah i know there's something but i don't think i have it in here i don't see it
so the only issue you can see on the bottom and you can see my we're getting the tax clearance
the philadelphia apartment revenue deposited just to make it try to be simple i have my own business
I'm a photographer and we pay, I paid my net profits tax.
They sent a letter saying that my husband owed that same amount of money.
I sent them the check that they deposited in April.
So, so I, I, I think, I think the issue is in our councils on the phone.
I think the only thing we look at is the taxes on the property.
No, that's all. Yeah. That's fine. That's totally fine.
Hilary, we're right with that. Right, Hilary?
That is correct, Mr. Chair.
Okay. So we're good with, don't worry about your, well,
and worry about your personal taxes, but we're just worried
about the property, okay? Yeah, I'm not worried about it.
It's just taking a long time, and I'm like, oh, okay.
All right, good. All right. Yeah.
Okay. And I think that's
the documents we've talked about.
All right, thank you. Questions from
the board? No,
Mr. Chairman. No, Chair.
No, Chair.
Questions or comments from our attorney,
Hillary Ambers?
Not at this time, Mr. Chair.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
I do not see any hands, Mr. Chair.
Okay, Planning Commission.
Good afternoon, Chair.
good afternoon chair peter bernard for the planning commission
peter just for the record spell your name okay p-e-t-e-r b as in boy a as in apple r as in
roger n as in nancy a as in apple r as in roger d as in dog you swear or firm to tell the truth
the whole truth and nothing but the truth i do chair please proceed the comprehensive plan
recommends no change to the existing RSA 5 residential single-family zoning at this location.
The proposed variance is for occupied area within 10% of what the zoning code requires. According
to the City Planning Commission staff's internal policy, we feel this is a minor variance in keeping
with the spirit and intention of the zoning code. Accordingly, the Planning Commission recommends
of the board grant the proposed dimensional variance for occupied area.
Thank you. MI 2023-005-359-118 Carpenter Street, I vote yes.
Thomas Holliman, my vote is yes. James Snell, my vote is yes.
okay you have your votes you have three votes that's the all the votes you need
oh thank you thank you all right thank you thank you all right um number one on our regular list
MI 2023, 004-551-241 East Gerard Avenue.
There's a letter of support from the Fishtown-Kensington Area Business Improvement District
and a letter of support from Fishtown Neighbors Association, which was the coordinating RCO.
Zen Jin is the attorney.
Zen Jin has been promoted to panelists.
Good afternoon, counsel.
Good afternoon.
You've already been sworn.
Just for the record, state your name.
Yes, my name is Zen Jin, Z-H-E-N-J-I-N.
Right.
And for the record, could you identify your client in relationship to this property?
My client is Mr. Daniel Angarianto.
He's the owner of the property.
Right.
And our vice chair has a question.
Isher, you on?
I'm sorry, Chair.
I was going to say, Mr. Shahid is having some audio issues.
We're trying to work those out.
Thomas, could you take care of this for me, please?
Good afternoon, counsel.
Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to his accuracy?
I will stipulate that it's a referral, but that it is accurate.
Did you email all of the exhibits and documents as required five days in advance to this hearing?
Yes. Thank you. Please proceed. Show your screen. Thank you. I'm going to share with the board the
information previously submitted in support of this application.
If the board could just bear with me for one second.
Can my exhibit be seen by everyone? You can, sir. Thank you. Good afternoon. Again, this is an
application for 241 East Girard Avenue. This is a referral. The property is actually located in the
CMX2 district, but a takeout restaurant and sit-down restaurant use is a special exception
in this district. The application itself is for the use of the first floor and basement portion
of the building as a restaurant. The applicant met with both the Fishtown Neighbors Association
as well as Fishtown Kensington Area Business Improvement District, and we have obtained
support from both organizations. This is essentially a cafe restaurant. My client
bought the property. It was at one point a pizzeria. However, thinking that before it was
a pizzeria and that there's no issues to simply convert it to a cafe, he went ahead and did the
work and converted and opened. At which point, license and inspections came and issued a
violation and shut him back down, saying no, despite the fact that it is a CMX2 district,
it is a special exception, and you didn't get the zoning permit. So we went back and applied for
the permit and went through the process with the community the restaurant is already fitted out
it is basically a renovation of the existing space into the new concept
the menu is mostly indonesian style food with cafe and food and was
uh indonesian style food with cafe and food and was uh and he served both breakfast uh lunch and
dinner and was well received by the community before he was actually shut down uh we're hoping
with the board's approval we will be able to talk to license inspections and have him reopen in the
near future from the design standpoint i'm going to zoom in and then move over to the layout from
the design standpoint, the property itself, the basement is mostly for storage. The first
floor is basically seating towards the front with an entryway to the restaurant and a separate
entryway to the second floor residential unit. The kitchen and restroom areas are towards
the back, and they do have a rear yard space as well. The storage of the trash would actually
be done through the back area, but it will be brought out to be picked up by commercial trash
pickup in the front. And again, we have the prep area, part of the prep area is in the basement
of the property as well. So from a standpoint of impact to the community required by special
exception. We have worked out a trash management plan with the community's review, and they're
satisfied that trash would be handled in a way that is consistent to what the community is looking
for in the neighborhood and from other businesses of its similar nature. So we do not believe with
the use that we're asking for at this location, it would pose a greater impact than normally would
be expected of a use of this nature. So with that, we were able to get support from both
organizations, and we would ask the board's favorable review of this application. I believe
my client is here to verify my testimony, and I'm happy to redirect to any part of the exhibits for
the board. Daniel Angriotto. Yeah, Daniel, if you're there, can you please raise your hand
virtually to be identified hello they have been allowed to speak hi sir could you state your name
and spell please for the court stenographer my name is daniel angrianto d-a-n-i-e-l
Last name
Angry Anto
A-N like an N-C
Robert I
Like an N-C
T like a time O
Like Oscar
You swear or affirm to tell the truth
The whole truth and nothing but the truth
Yes I do
Please proceed counsel
Thank you
Daniel did you see my presentation
And hear my representation to the zoning board
Yes, I did.
Can you verify that what I have represented and testified to before the board is true and correct and adopted as your own testimony?
Yes, I did.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Questions from the board?
No, Mr. Chairman.
No, Chair.
Questions or comments from our attorney, Hillary Emerson?
not at this time mr chair questions or comments from the virtual audience
mr chair i have a murray goods black with their hand raised
okay i will allow them to speak at this time
all right could you state your name please and spell for the court stenographer
yeah hello my name is murray goodesplat that is m-u-r-r-a-y goodesplat g-u-d-e-s-b-l-a-t
right do you swear we're firm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth
i do sir please proceed um i do want to say that uh as a member of the community
I really like this restaurant. I like the owners. I like their old restaurant as well.
And I would really appreciate it if you guys allowed them to open up and continue their business.
Thank you for taking the time to close. We appreciate your input.
Is there anyone else in the virtual audience?
Somebody's selling you a bath.
I see no answer this time, Chair.
Hi, Planning Commission.
good afternoon chair peter bernard for the planning commission the comprehensive plan
recommends no change to the existing cmx2 commercial mixed use zoning at this location
the applicant has shown that the proposed eating and drinking establishment would have no detrimental
impact beyond what might be expected from this use this accordingly the planning commission
Accordingly, the Planning Commission recommends that the board grant the proposed special exemption for eating and drinking establishment.
recommends that the board grant the proposed special exam
Thank you. MI 2023-004-551-241 East Sherrod Avenue, I vote yes.
Thomas Holliman, my vote is yes.
James Snell, my vote is yes.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you, sir.
Number two, MI 2022-000295-601 West Cliveden Street.
Meredith Ferlinger is the attorney.
A letter of support from the West Mount Airy neighbors.
Chair, she'll be coming back in as a panelist now.
Sure, thank you.
Thank you.
Hi, Chair.
This is Tanya.
Can you? I just wanted to check and see if Ishmael can speak to me.
Sure. Ish?
Can you hear me now?
Yes. Thank you very kindly, Chair.
Thank you. Thank you. Thank you both.
Good afternoon, counsel. Just for the record, could you state your name and spell for the court reporter?
Sure. My name is Meredith Ferliger, F-E-R-L-E-G-E-R, with Dolworth Paxson, 1500 Market Street, Suite 3500E.
Do you swear a firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Will you identify your client in a relationship to the property?
Sure. My client is Downing Cliveden, LLC, the owner of the property.
We did include the deed at Exhibit 3.
And our vice chair has just a few questions for you.
Good afternoon, counsel. Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate towards accuracy?
i do there are some changes to the request which i will address in my presentation but the refusal
as it exists currently is accurate no problem i'm just uh have you emailed in all the required
documents and exhibits that is needed five days prior to this hearing i have thank you please
proceed thank you and i hope you can see my my shared exhibits we can thank you uh mr chairman
members of the board, as I referenced, the request that we are making today has been considerably
reduced so that the nature of the request today is merely to correct a long-standing unit count
discrepancy. So I will keep this brief unless the board does have additional questions at the end of
the presentation. By way of history, the zoning application before the board today was first
initiated by the prior owner of this property back in 2021. You can see that on the refusal.
That initial request was twofold. First, as you'll see on the refusal I have up at Exhibit 1,
the first part of the application sought to correct a unit count discrepancy. L&I's records
show that this property has 58 units, where 60 units actually exist. Second, the former owner
was looking to add an additional five units at this property. When my client purchased the property,
we sought to resume those efforts. As a result of community discussions, my client has agreed to
forego the additional five units. And instead, the only request before the board today is the
legalization of those two missing units. As you referenced in your introduction in your packet
at tab 13, there is a letter of support from West Mount Airy Neighbors specifically for this
legalization request and based on the discussions that we had and the understanding that they were
not going to be seeking those additional five units anymore. By way of context, the zoning map
I have shown up on the screen at Exhibit 5 shows that this property at 601 West Cliveden Street
is just off the corner of Lincoln Drive and West Cliveden Street. Despite the property's
century-long history as an apartment complex, this property, like many others similar to it
around the city, is zoned RSD3, a single family zoning classification. As you'll note in the
aerials, this is really quite a gorgeous old structure that was first built in the 1920s.
I did include some additional photographs at Exhibit 14, and I'll just briefly scroll through
them just so you can get a sense. Many of you have probably noticed this property as you've
driven down Lincoln Drive in the past. Importantly, and as you'll see from some
of the photographs, since my client purchased this property roughly a year ago, they've
they've undertaken a long overdue significant renovation project of the interior.
undertaken a long overdue significant renovation.
And these are just some of the photos we show the community to show the before condition
and the after condition of the kind of work that the owner has been doing.
So again, just for context, this was the condition of many of the units when they purchased it.
And these are the renovations that are still well underway in this property.
to really bring it back to some life.
As far as the units are concerned,
I did include some past permits for the property at Exhibit 7.
What I tried to do is just kind of highlight to direct your eye.
But what I've been able to gather is that L&I has had documentation
over the course of many decades
showing this property containing anywhere between 57 and 61 units.
most recently 58 in 1977. You can see, I probably should have made it a little bit of a thicker red
line, but you can see if I go back 58, 58, and then we start 57, and 61.
So there was apparently, from what we've been able to glean, a fire in the property back in the 1960s,
And my assumption is that someone miscounted the units that were renovated back in the 70s.
Ultimately, there is no clear evidence in any of the existing units in this building to suggest that any of the former owners impermissibly added two units at any time.
Our assumption, based on all the information we have, is that the units have always been there and somebody simply miscounted at one point in time.
So, of course, the hardship before the board today is really quite simple.
Since this property is zoned RSD3, any zoning application for this property, now or in the future, is going to trigger the need for this owner to seek relief from the board.
Funny enough, this building and its multifamily use predate the zoning code itself, since it was built in 1920 and the zoning code didn't come around until the 1930s.
So it would really be quite an unambiguous hardship to convert this property back into single-family use.
Properties akin to this one across the city are usually zone RM3 or 4, which of course would not require this type of relief for an inconsequential type of request.
We, of course, submit that the proposed use is the least minimum and will not change the usage of this building in any way, but will simply bring the building's permitting up to date.
It is important to note how critical these types of requests are to ensure that the city and particularly the fire department has an accurate number of the existing units on file.
We do, of course, submit the proposal complies in full with each of the requirements of Code Section 3038E.2 that I will not address at length unless the board desires additional argument.
Full analysis is included in my Memorandum of Law at Exhibit 10.
So at this time, I'm hopeful my client representative, Isaac Shinerman, is available to adopt my testimony.
Moni, Isaac, if you are there, if you could raise your hand and wait for the administrator to unmute you.
They've been allowed to speak.
Good morning. Good afternoon. How are you?
Could you state your name and spell for the court stenographer?
Isaac Scheinerman, last name S-C-H-E-I-N-E-R-M-A-N.
Right.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Proceed, counsel.
Isaac, you are an authorized member of Downing Cliveden, LLC, and you're authorized to speak on its behalf?
And have you heard all of the testimony and evidence that I offered before the board today?
I did.
And do you agree that that testimony is true and accurate, and would you adopt that testimony as if you had given it yourself?
i could not have done it as elegant as you but yes thank you if the board has any further
questions we're happy to ask questions from the board no mr chairman no chair questions or
comments from our attorney hillary emerson just a quick question um on the deed it notes that
there's a second minor owner hwh collabs in llc um are they part of the same ownership group
they are okay so so mr um schneiderman could speak on behalf of both
Okay, so Mr. Schneiderman could speak on behalf of both?
Correct, I can.
Okay, thank you very much.
Thank you.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
I have Charles Richardson with her hand raised.
I have allowed him to speak at this time.
Hi, Mr. Richardson.
Could you state your name, please, and spell for the court stenographer?
Good afternoon, Mr. Chair.
Charles Richardson, R-I-C-H-A-R-D-S-O-N, Office of Councilwoman Cindy Bass from 508 City Hall.
You swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Please proceed.
Councilwoman has no objection to granting the variance as proposed.
Thank you very much for taking the time to cause.
Is there anyone else in the virtual audience?
I do not see any further answers.
planning commission good afternoon i am paula p-a-u-l-a from below b-r-u-m-b-e-l-o-w
burns b-u-r-n-s and i'm with this philadelphia city planning commission
great do you swear on firm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth
i do please proceed the comprehensive plan recommends a zoning map change to rm4
residential multifamily use at this location. The proposal for the proposed dwelling unit density
conforms to the recommended district. The City Planning Commission recommends that the Zoning
Board grant propose the use variance for the number of dwelling units. Thank you. MI 2022-000-295-601
West Cliveland Street, I vote yes. Proviso, maximum 60 dwelling units. Thomas Holloman,
My vote is yes, with proviso.
James Snell, my vote is yes, with proviso.
Ishmael Shaheen, my vote is yes, with proviso.
Thank you, counsel.
Thank you.
Number three, MI 2023, 002-414, 4900 North 11th Street.
Bart Levy is the attorney.
Recognition of support from the Logan Civic Association.
There is a proviso, no exterior play space.
Mr. Levy is coming back in as a panelist.
Mr. Levy, if I remember correctly, I already swore you in.
Could you just state your name and if you would identify your client in
relationship to this property?
Certainly.
My client, my name is Bart Levy, B-A-R-T-L-E-V-Y.
My client is Shirley Daughtry, who is the lessor of the commercial property at 4900 North 11th Street.
All right. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
Yes, Mr. Chairman, I do.
Our vice chair has just a few questions, sir.
Certainly.
Good afternoon, counsel. Do you agree to wait to read another refusal or stipulate to his accuracy?
Yes, sir.
Have you emailed in all the required documents and exhibits that is needed and required to proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing?
I got the bulk of the materials in four days, and we got the RCO meeting just last night.
If that is sufficient, we'll proceed.
If not, yes, you sent it in already, right?
Did you send it in?
Okay, yes, please proceed.
Okay. Let me see if I can share my screen.
Hold on.
It's interesting. There's no button. Oh, there it is.
So this
This is the refusal that we got.
The project that my client envisions is taking an existing retail space, which is not being used at $4,900, and turning it into a children's daycare.
The meeting last night was favorable to the extent that eight people voted to support.
We had no dissent or no opposition.
The project, and I'll skip right down to the plans themselves.
The project does not envision changing or making any alteration to the structure of this property whatsoever.
We're simply taking an area that was used as a retail establishment.
We're simply taking an area that was used as a retail establishment and will now use it as a daycare area.
I can show you photographs of the disrepair it is in now.
One second.
there will be one second
is that picture uh come on that's it we that's what it looks like now yeah okay that's the
entrance to the uh facility as it is now is that is that on your screen as well it is it is sir
All right. I can show you any other examples of what it is now, but I'd rather show you what my client proposes to do with it, as she has in her other daycare center.
This area here will be turned into essentially like a classroom and learning area.
That's what the front of the property will look like.
And this is essentially, you know, the inside of a daycare area right now.
I would like to put my client on and have her answer any questions about the operation of this business that you might have.
Because there won't be any.
Why don't we bring her on to adopt your testimony, okay?
Very good.
Ms. Dauntry, are you there?
They've been allowed to speak.
hi could you state your name please and spell for the court stenographer
my name is shirley daughtry s-h-i-r-l-e-y last name is d as in dog a-u-g-h-t-r-y
right do you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth
yes proceed counsel miss daughtry um did you you heard my statements to the zoning board is that
right? Yes. Instead of adopting them right now, is there anything you'd like to add to that?
Yeah, I would like to add that I am a licensed child care owner professional.
I have been in business for four and a half years. I am located, my first center is located
two blocks away, 4825 North Broad Street. And I am just looking to expand my center.
This property that I leased out in March was referred to me by my pastor. And the owner just
had like a vacant use. He did explain to me years ago, a lot of years ago, like back in the 1980s,
um the building was leased for a child care center so once upon a time it was a child care
center there and then over the time it just the the change of the they just changed the use
a few times so i'm just hoping to get the building back um turned to a child care center
so that i can operate a child care center in inside of the space and the floor plan that we
basically uh submitted is that the floor plan you intend to keep yes no changes to the structure to
the building whatsoever just make it nice and colorful for the children thank you mr chairman
do you have any any other questions so hillary is that an appropriate proviso before i ask if they
accept it so a couple a couple things on that one um it didn't look like there was any exterior
space on the property for a play space to begin with um so i i don't think the proviso makes
sense from that perspective if the applicant were to seek play space say on the the right of way
um that would be something that would need to be considered by the streets department by the state
and possibly by city council so i i don't think the proviso is necessary all right thank you
Questions or comments from the board?
No, Mr. Chairman.
No, Chair.
No, Chair.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
Mr. Chair, I have Charles Richardson with the hand raised.
I have allowed him to speak.
Mr. Richardson, as you know, you've already been sworn, sir.
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
State your name.
Charles Richardson, Office of Councilwoman Cindy Bass, room 508 City Hall.
So the proviso was that request came from the idea that the.
the um proviso was that request came from the idea that the possibility could be that they could
uh have some type of play space on that roof area above that's above the uh single story and i know
that that was a major concern and uh that's why that was uh actually proposed and i'm just asking
that if Ms. Daughtry, through Mr. Levy, can actually speak to that,
that there is no intention on putting any play space on that roof area.
Is that your intention, Ms. Daughtry?
Is your intention to use the space on the roof as a play space?
I'm sorry, I had to unmute myself.
No, no intention on using the roof as a play space,
on the inside space and if i wish to like expand outside i'll seek you know council um but no no
it's ain't going outside use just our our business will be confined within the walls of the existing
structure okay uh with that the councilwoman uh has no uh objection to uh granting the barriers
thank you is there anyone else in the virtual audience
mr chair i just wanted to add i didn't realize that the roof is what it had been discussed i
assumed it was ground level but if some sort of like roof deck play area um was proposed
that typically would require a variance because it would be a non it would be a commercial use
as opposed to a residential use yeah of the the roof so i just wanted to put that on the record
as well all right thank you is there anyone else in the virtual audience
i do not see any further hands mr chair high cleaning commission
hi i'm paula brumblow burns with the planning commission
the comprehensive plan recommends no change to the rs3 residential single-family zoning at this
location however the property has a documented history of commercial and multi-family the
appellant has demonstrated sufficient hardship accordingly the city planning commission
recommends the board grant the proposed use variance for a child care center thank you thank
you and hillary one other thing uh do we put use limited to ground floor um we can do that because
i believe there's two other dwelling units that are not involved right mr levy well to the kind
of to the side and above um but i believe the lease specifically says ground floor for this
portion of the property that's correct okay all right um thank you mi 2023 002 414 4900
north 11th street i vote yes thomas hollow my vote is yes james snell my vote is yes
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes
Thank you, counsel
We're grateful, thank you
All right, number six
MI 2023-005-131-3325-North17
Brandon Saverin is the attorney
Letter of support from
Nicetown-Tayoga Improvement Team
Mr. Saverin will be rejoining as a panelist
good afternoon members of the board hi just for the record could you state your name and spell
please for the court sonographer yes um brandon saverin it's spelled uh b-r-a-n-d-o-n
and then saverin is s as in sam a v as in victor r-a-n as in nancy do you swear or firm 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 uh my client is ferris realty llc and the llc is the owner of the
property okay our our vice chair has just a few questions for you sir good afternoon council do
you agree to weigh the reading of the refusal and stipulate to his accuracy uh yes i do mr vice
chairman have you have you emailed in all the required documents that is needed and required
to proceed with this case yes thank you please proceed cheers thank you
okay um well um good afternoon again members of the board and thank you in advance for your time
the property that i'm here to speak on behalf today is 3325 north 17th street
on your screen right now is a rendering of the front of what we are proposing to build
we are proposing to build on the property and the property is a vacant lot, which according to city
on the property and the property is a vacant lot
records has been a vacant lot since at least 2008. As I'll show you some pictures of in a moment,
this block has a tremendous vacancy. As of 2022, which was the last time the city took an aerial
image of the block, 38 of the 48 parcels were vacant land. So this is actually the only
exhibit, if you will, that I did not send among the other exhibits. So the main set of exhibits
I sent were exhibits one through 11. I sent this in separately and would ask that it be
considered Exhibit 12 and that all 12 exhibits are moved into the record following my presentation
today. Okay. Thank you. So moving on, on your screen right now is a part of Exhibit 2. There
we go. And this is our proviso plan. So if you are inclined to grant the variances that we're
requesting today, I would ask that you do so with the proviso approving the variances pursuant to
this one-page proviso plan. And then on this page, that was Exhibit 2E. This is Exhibit 2F,
which is our proviso form. And it talks about the changes that were made since the original plan
that was submitted to L&I versus our proviso plan. Perhaps the most important one on the bottom here
is that we've reduced the proposal from eight to seven units. Also important, if I go back for a
second to our rendering. Originally, this unit in what is really a partially above ground basement
was served by stairs. We're now proposing that it be served by an exterior ramp so that the unit
will be ADA type B accessible when constructed. This is actually the largest unit in the building
and it will be ready to be adapted into a space that can serve a wheelchair-bound disabled tenant.
So that's a new addition, the transformation of that basement unit in that regard,
and then also some very small dimensional changes that do not affect any of the refusals.
I do have floor plans at Exhibit 10, and I will not go through these.
I'll just note that I do have our architect here who can walk you through them after my presentation, if you wish, and that the building is proposed to be composed of five one-bedroom units, one studio, and one two-bedroom unit.
The two-bedroom unit is the ADA type B unit that I mentioned.
As the chairman mentioned earlier, that is way too far zoomed out.
I apologize.
At exhibit, I believe this is 9D, is our letter of support from the coordinating RCO, which notes that the votes taken at the RCO meeting, which I attended, were 11 in favor of the project and one opposed.
Exhibit 2A is our notice of refusal from L&I.
So just to go through this very quickly, there are two used refusals.
refusels, one pertaining to lack of parking and one pertaining to use. It's a single family
district, RSA3, so anything above one unit is not permitted. I'll address that and why we have a
hardship related to that in a second. As far as parking, I'll also show you some images on the
block and you'll see that it would be really out of context to provide off-street parking based on
what does already exist on the block. And I'll discuss the dimensional refusals in a moment as
well. I'll just note that as a prior attorney did in one of their presentations, I have also
authored a memo of law to the board. That's one of my exhibits. And that's where I sort of lay
out in full the arguments for why I believe we're entitled to variances under the code for all these
issues. So I'll keep it brief on that. So you can refer to my memo. Let me talk about the context
of the block for a moment. So Exhibit 6 has all sorts of images and maps from Atlas. This is an
image here from 2008 and the reason i'm showing you that is because from 2008 to 2022
as far as we're aware only one new structure was constructed so as i mentioned 38 of the 48
parcels as of the last aerial image were vacant so this is a block that has had a
as of the last aerial image were vacant. So this is a block that has had a ton of vacancy
and really no economic development activity or very, very little of it.
At exhibit 11, as part of my memo, I created this table and it shows you that of the 10
structures that are on the block, eight of them, including the one newer building, are all
multifamily. 3319 is that the one building, the only building that was built within the past two
decades. That's a six unit building. So all of the buildings are multifamily residential,
which we're proposing as well, except for 3324, on which I could find no records,
meaning no zoning permits or rental licenses. And then there was one additional building that
actually had permits for non-residential use. But sort of summing that all up, there seems to be
strong indication based on the city's records that there are no single family homes currently
on this block. And between that and the fact that the board granted a variance for six units
to the only structure recently constructed on this block, I believe that's all evidence of
a hardship that the market does not support the construction of a new single family home
zone in this vicinity. I will, give me one second, flip the pages here.
I won't walk you through them, but all the sort of line items you see in this chart are backed
up with evidence on the ensuing pages of my packet. So I have the most recent rental license
or the most recent zoning permit for each and every one of those properties. Let me go to real
quickly, the zoning permit for that one new structure, the six unit, you can see six unit
mentioned here in this permit, which was granted in 2020. And this was granted pursuant to a
variance from this board. The reason I bring that up specifically is I also included the refusal
from that project. And what's interesting about this is that this refusal lists the exact same
set of issues as our refusal. So when you look at our refusal and you see five cited code sections,
you think, wow, this project is really sort of shattering all the rules. But it's the same set
of issues that the board-granted variance is on three years ago to a property that is almost next
door to ours, I think a few doors down. Here's our refusal for comparison. And really what the
refusals beyond use come down to is that if you can't build a single family home here, you need
the envelope of the building to sort of exceed some of the dimensional limitations in order to
fit the building and have the units be humanely sized, which I think we're doing by nature of
these variances. But I'd say our project even improves on the one down the street. We are
proposing a side yard on one side that that structure did not um etc um i will just wrap up
um by showing you um some street level photos so here from atlas uh this year which is only taken
a couple months ago is our block looking south and here's our block looking north and what you
can see is that the the buildings are that are there remember only 10 of the 48 lots are occupied
with buildings. But they don't have parking. They're sort of, you know, built with front
porches in a certain architectural style that more or less fits together. And again, to go to
our rendering, we're doing our best to honor that and to match it, to put, say, like the building
on stilts and have a layer of, you know, surface parking. It's just, it's going to stick out like
a sore thumb in the context of this block. No one at the RCO meeting raised a request for us to do
that. And last but not least, I'll just show you our zoning posters to avoid any doubt that they
were put up. And again, just another opportunity to sort of show you the degree of vacancy in the
area. That concludes my presentation. And I am happy to answer questions. Also happy to have
the architect walk through the floor plans if you'd like. Brandon, one quick question. How did
you get to the number? So, Mr. Chairman, as I mentioned, six was the number that the applicant
in 2020, who is not us, I can promise you, no relation, felt that they had to build in order
to have a financeable project. So, we actually started at eight. What we didn't like about eight
is that there was this really uniform pattern of units. So, we combined two of the units into
the ada unit and um that um and nadal who's one of the project partners
And that and Nadal, who's one of the project partners, can testify to this if you'd like.
But that was sort of like the bare minimum that he believes will work to get financing to build something here.
OK. All right. Thank you. Why don't you bring your client on?
OK, so that's Nadal Hassan, who I just mentioned.
They have been allowed to speak.
Hi, sir. Could you state your name and spell, please, for the court's sonographer?
Nantie, I-D-A-L, last name Hassan, H-A-S-S-E-N as a Nantie.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Please proceed.
Thank you. Nadal, are you authorized to speak on behalf of Ferris Realty, LLC?
Did you hear my testimony in your zoning case this afternoon?
Was it true and accurate to the best of your knowledge, information and belief?
Would you therefore adopt it as if it were your own on behalf of the LLC?
And just one more question since the chairman raised it, or maybe I'll make it a two-parter.
As far as you're aware, my representation about there only being multifamily residential uses on this block, was that accurate?
And was my representation about your need to construct this number of units to get construction financing, was that accurate?
Absolutely.
I did my research before I even purchased a lot.
Thank you.
All right.
Questions from the board?
No, Mr. Chairman.
No, Chair.
no chair questions or comments from our attorney hillary emerson
not at this time mr chair questions or comments from the virtual audience
mr chair i have charles richardson again with the hand raised i have allowed them to speak
hi mr richardson could you please uh just state your name and and um present your testimony you've
already been sworn certainly mr chair charles richardson r-i-c-h-a-r-d-s-o-n office of
councilwoman cindy bass room 508 city hall councilwoman has no objection to granting the
variance okay thank you very much i appreciate it um anyone else in a virtual audience
i do not see any further hands mr chair planning commission
good afternoon chair peter bernard for the planning commission
the comprehensive plan recommends a change in zoning to rm1 residential multifamily at this
location under the recommended residential multifamily one zoning the appellant would
be allowed four dwelling units by right and staff are aware of several three dwelling unit
buildings currently on the block as such we feel the eight units proposed represents an overuse
and that the dimensional variances stem from the proposed unit count accordingly the planning
commission recommends that the board grant the proposed variance for multi-family use in a
single-family zone but with a maximum of four dwelling units um mr chairman if i could just
quickly let me just let thank you sir thank you thank you planning commission proceed go ahead
OK, I'm sorry. That's OK. Mr. Bernard is absolutely right in that there are a handful of three unit buildings, but they're very old, at least 20 years, if not much more.
Again, the only recent construction is one single building that has six units.
And that project received basically the same dimensional variances that we are requesting today.
So, you know, just to keep in mind, I think there's past evidence of all sorts that we're sticking to the minimum necessary relief that we need to build something here.
Okay. MI 2023
005 131
3325 North 17th Street. I vote yes
with proviso. Maximum six dwelling units
revised plans one page stamped by ZBA
December 13th 2023.
Thomas Holloman
yes with proviso.
James Snell, my vote is yes with proviso.
Ishmael Shahid, my vote is yes with proviso.
Counsel, could you stay on, please?
Okay. Sure. All right. So MI 2020, number seven, MI 2023, 005, 036, 54 East Brighthurst Street.
Okay, sure.
All right.
So MI 2020, number seven.
Brandon is the attorney. Hold on a minute. Letter of support from Wakefield 49ers Community
Development and Approvement Association. Letter of non-opposition from Solo Germantown
with the following provisos. Mr. Saverin, you've already been sworn to state your name for the
record. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Yeah, Brandon Saverin. And could you identify your client
relationship to the property? Yes, my client is Red Brick Builders, LLC. That is the owner
of the property. And our vice chair has a few questions for you. Good afternoon, counsel. Do
agreed to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy? Yes, I do. Have you
emailed then all the required documents and exhibits that is needed and required to proceed
with this case five days in advance of this hearing? Yes. Thank you. Please proceed to share.
Oh, I'm so sorry, Mr. Vice Chairman, for full truth. The tax clearance information and the RCU
letter did not uh get sent to the board until yesterday uh but but it's in now just just to be
okay i trust you brandon it's good okay thanks uh let's see
one moment i'm sorry i'm just having a little trouble getting my screen sharing started
there we go okay um good afternoon again members of the board um so the property i'm
uh here to speak about uh in this hearing is 54 east bringhurst street um in the uh really the
center of the germantown uh neighborhood um on your screen right now is um exhibit 2b uh from
our exhibit binder. This is the notice of refusal, and I would move that the 10 exhibits that I
submitted in addition to the RCO letters and the tax clearance information be moved into the record
following the hearing. Okay. Yes, sir. So I'll do this case in a little bit more of a traditional
manner. Let's start with the refusal. So what we're proposing to do as the refusal says is to
demolish the existing structure, which I'll show you in a moment, and replace it with at least in
the front what's going to look like an identical structure. And you might think I'm exaggerating
when I say identical, but wait until you see a picture of it a second. And really the main
difference between what's there now and what we're proposing is that the proposed building
will have two units instead of one. We also drew a dimensional refusal for the front setback,
but that is going to match the home that's currently there. Talk about that more in a moment.
And we drew a refusal for a side yard setback, but we are actually going to make the side yard
setback bigger than what it is now it's it's just still going to fall a little short of the required
five feet um more on that in a moment um so let me show you the zoning map which is exhibit five
um slightly zoomed out image on top zoomed in image in the bottom but like many of the lots
in the sort of historic central part of germantown this is a very skinny and narrow lot so it's only
17 and a half feet wide, but it's 150 feet deep. And I sort of just bring that up and show you
the image of the rectangle here, because we'll be able to talk about that issue in a moment.
At Exhibit 7 are zoning posters, and that's a good opportunity to show you
the structure that's there now. So the structure that's there now, according to records at li.philo.gov,
has been vacant since 2007. And there was a catastrophic fire in 2010. So at this point,
it has not been inhabited in over 15 years. My client purchased it recently, and is basically
has fully determined, I think, after careful study, that the structure cannot be salvaged,
It must be demolished for safety. It's a, you know, I think a three-story structure with a
small third floor. Let me just jump to an image of what we're proposing to build.
So this is a poster board that my client David made and we showed
This is a poster board that my client David made and we showed at the RCO meeting, and it really was meant to evidence his sincere intent to match what's there now.
So this on the right is, you know, a rendering of the front facade of what he's proposing to build all the way down to the same color of the window frames, the size of the dormer on the third floor and the location of the chimney.
Pete, this is sort of text that David put together, but it talks about the fire damage to the existing structure, because we really wanted to make clear to the community that we honor the sort of historic fabric of this block.
But this building simply couldn't be saved, unfortunately.
There is also a set of floor plans that were part of this set that went to the RCOs.
I should say RCOs because more than one RCO attended this meeting.
And it's really, I think, not an attempt to be greedy with the number of units.
It's just two.
Two, David felt, was the minimum number of units that he has to build in order to get financing to demolish and clean up the fire damaged house and rebuild.
The lower floor is going to be its own unit.
It would be a thousand square feet, roughly.
Oh, sorry, I'm going the wrong way here.
And I believe that that is really not elevated off of the ground so much that it'd be maybe
not ADA accessible in a literal sense, but at least pretty easy to get into for someone
with disabilities.
The second and third floor would be the other unit combined.
um that they come in i think at a little over 1500 square feet and the third floor is is sort
of modest it just occupies the front of the structure um this is a a property that is 2600
square feet so um to go back for one second of the zoning map what's interesting and i don't
really know the reason for this to be honest but um we're on like what you would call the unit block
the zero block of East Springhurst. The next block is the 200 block, and it's largely zoned
RM1, even though it looks really like identical to our block. So if we were on that block,
if we were RM1, we would have the right to build six units here. We're not even coming close to
that, but just to sort of throw that out there. And I think that the RCOs felt that this was
sort of a tasteful reserved request. This is the meeting summary by the coordinating RCO,
which was the Wakefield 49ers. No letter here, but one of the affected RCOs, Solo Germantown,
did write a letter and sort of, I think, walks through some of the same points I'm going to make
in my presentation, so I won't summarize it. But I see here it says to preserve, quote,
as many original architectural artifacts, end quote, as possible. Just to talk a little bit
about the block, and then I'll wrap up. At exhibit six of our packet was a satellite image and a
parcel map, but it just, it came out really blurry when I compressed this. So I'm going to show you
the same thing on Atlas's website. And first, I just want to talk about that refusal for
the front of the structure. If you zoom in really close here, this TAM box reflects the house that's
there now. And you'll see that our structure is seven feet from the street, whereas the adjacent
structure is, I think, nine feet and change. And the way the zoning code works here is that we're
supposed to match the closest structure if there's only a structure on one side. So the rule is we
had to build a nine plus feet setback. But what we proposed and explained this to the RCOs is we
want to leave it where it is now. And where it is now matches up with the buildings on the other
side. So there's no uniform pattern of setbacks on this block. You can readily see that. Some of
of no setbacks at all, just to sort of preserve rear yard space. And because there's no porches
on most of these houses, so the space in the front is sort of dead space. We didn't want to go to
nine, nine and a half feet. We just want to keep it where it is now at seven, and it'll fit in
perfectly with our neighbors to the Northeast. And I would call that a de minimis variance.
So under that argument, the hardship is not even needed for that particular issue.
The other dimensional variance is side yard setback.
Right now, there is a very code non-conforming,
Right now, there is a very code non-conforming, I would argue dangerous alley between us and our neighbor to the southwest.
I would argue dang
It's only about a foot, maybe a foot and a half wide. So we're going to improve on that.
We're going to make it three feet. Three feet will allow it to be considered an emergency egress under the building code.
It's it's enough space that we're not going to be sort of bringing up structural concerns.
we it's enough space that we won't disturb our historic neighbor here when we're doing our
building so we definitely didn't want to be attached even though the code would have allowed
that um and and finally you know if we had gone with five feet the code says you're either attached
which we didn't want to do for safety or five feet and if you're if we had done five feet
our house would have been i guess 12 and a half feet or less once you include the thickness of
the walls inside. That's a really narrow row home. That's too narrow to be saleable. A typical
Philadelphia row home, I would say, are 15, 16 feet in width. So having the three feet side yard
instead of five will allow us to have sort of a normal feeling product, but still it's safe.
It's going to meet building code requirements for emergency regress. And then finally,
It just came up in my last hearing. I know the board takes an interest in whether there's other multifamily on the block.
So I did find licenses for duplexes at 58 East Bringhurst, 60 East Bringhurst and 66 East Bringhurst.
And we're 54. So they're right down the block from us. Those are all duplexes.
And we're not aware of any construction whatsoever on this block since 2004.
So that's just to say that the economics are that it's really hard to get financing to build anything here.
And two units was the minimum that, you know, David feels like he can engage with commercial lenders and get something going here.
So let me check my notes. I think. Yep. That's going to conclude my testimony.
Why don't you bring your client on and adopt your testimony?
Okay. David Redenbaugh is his name.
They've been allowed to speak.
Sir, could you state your name and spell it for the court's stenographer?
Sure. David Redenbaugh. R-E-D-E-N-B-A-U-G-H.
Right. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes. Proceed, counsel.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
David, are you authorized to speak on behalf of Red Brick Builders, LLC?
Yes, I am.
Did you hear my testimony in your zoning case this afternoon?
I did.
Was it true and accurate to the best of your knowledge, information, and belief?
How about what I had to say about the fire in the structure?
Was that accurate to the best of your knowledge in particular?
Yes, absolutely.
And would you, therefore, adopt all of my testimony as if it had been your own?
Thank you.
Questions from the board?
No, Mr. Chairman.
No, Chair.
No, Chair.
Questions or comments from our attorney, Hillary Emerson?
Not at this time, Mr. Chair.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
mr chair i have charles richardson with his with their hand raised i have allowed them to speak at
this time hi mr richardson just state your name please you've already been sworn
charles richardson office of councilwoman cindy bass room 508 city hall councilwoman has no
objection to granting the variance thank you very much is there anyone else in the virtual audience
i do not see any further hands mr chair
Hi, Planning Commission.
Excuse me, Mr. Chair, I'm sorry to interrupt you, but I have one more hand up from Rosalind McKelvey.
Do you want another person to speak?
Hi, could you state your name, please, and spell for the court stenographer?
Good afternoon.
My name is Rosalind McKelvey, R-O-S-A-L-I-N-D, McKelvey, M as in Mary, C-K-E-L-V as in Victor, E-Y.
Right. Do you swear or affirm that tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Yes, sir.
Please proceed.
On behalf of the Wakefield 49ers and the neighbors that attended the meeting, they were very pleased to hear that there was going to be something done with this property.
As far as there being two oppositions, one was because they weren't sure where the property line ended, and the applicant supplied everything we asked for, plus evidence that it didn't interfere with their property.
everything we asked for, plus evidence that it didn't interfere with their property.
So the community has no problem.
As far as there being a proviso, that was not put up by the neighbors.
The neighbors are perfectly satisfied with everything presented.
So we have no problem and ask that it go forward.
Thank you.
Thank you so much for taking the time to call us.
We appreciate it.
And, you know, we pay attention to what you have to say.
Is there anyone else in the virtual audience?
no further answer mr chair planning commission
good afternoon chair peter bernard for the planning commission
the comprehensive plan recommends no change to the existing rsa five residential single
family zoning at this location we feel the applicant has demonstrated sufficient hardship
and that the proposal represents the minimum necessary variances accordingly the planning
Commission recommends the Board grant the proposed variance for two dwelling units and the proposed
variances for side yard setback and front facade setback. Thank you. MI 2023-005-036-54 East
Wright-Hurst Street, I vote yes. Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes.
James Snell, my vote is yes.
Ishmael Shahid, my vote is yes.
Thank you, counsel.
Thank you.
Number eight, MI 2022-005-928-4829 Haverford Avenue.
Alan Notkinson is the attorney.
There is a letter of opposition from Mill Creek Advisory Council.
there will be rejoining as a panel thank you
mr knockamson
it appears
mr goldberg has his hand up um
okay i'm sure you most certainly
they'll be doing this panelist soon okay
to Goldberg
oh oh there's a okay could you uh state your name and i think if i remember correctly
sometime this morning i swore you in once before yes uh this is alan knockamson of knockamson pc
at a-l-a-n last name knockamson n-o-c-h-u-m-s-o-n um i apologize literally my computer died as soon
as I entered into the virtual panel audience.
So I met Mr. Goldberg.
We've all experienced that.
Yeah, so I'm going to be a little slow on the trigger here.
Could you identify your client
and their relationship to the property?
Yeah, 4829 Haverford.
That would be Pebble Development LLC.
And the virtual audience is Mustafa Askan.
And our vice chair has a few questions for you.
Good afternoon, counsel.
or do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal
or stipulate towards accuracy?
Have you emailed in all the required documents
and exhibits that is needed and required to proceed
with this case five days in advance of this hearing?
Yes, I have.
Thank you.
Please proceed.
Thank you.
I do apologize if I'm a little slow here.
This is Mr. Goldberg's computer,
a little different than mine.
All right, so I'm going to present 4829 Haverford Avenue.
I did hear that there was, you know, a reference to opposition to our project.
This was not a well-attended meeting.
And in actuality, what we experienced was, well, this has been a vacant lot for such a long time.
We love the open area.
Even if you proposed a single-family lot, we would be opposed to that.
So, they're just opposed to anything here. And I think really 4829 Haverford, it does make sense given the size of the lot and the location of the property and the vicinity of multifamily structures for this to be a triplex.
So they're just opposed to anything here.
And I think really for...
So during our presentation, I'm going to review the notice of refusal, the brief correspondence from the Mill Creek Advisory Council, where they again, there are only issues that they referenced in their letter or the dimensions of the property, which they believe were in dispute and asked us to do a survey.
Again, I don't believe there's any dispute in terms of our dimensions, but that was the only reason that they gave to oppose our project.
And as I referenced, nearby recently granted multifamily variances with RSA 5 zoning designation, we have just on Haverford Avenue, 4913, 5110, 5108 Haverford, and then nearby 4801 Fairmont and 5024 Ray Street, all located nearby, similarly multifamily in nature.
Then we'll review the zoning maps and the maps of the area, photographs of the property and the surrounding area.
Examples of interior photographs of other projects that my client through and construction analysis have done.
So you'll see that they're well versed in taking vacant land and converting it into multifamily structures.
Our plantain drawings, and you'll see that our lot, which is almost 2,500 square feet.
comfortably fits three units in there where even having three units on a 2,500 square foot lot,
we're going to have an open area of almost 41%. We'll show you the RCO meeting notice or
application for appeal. Our deeds of property showing that Pebble Development LLC is the owner
of the property and our certificate of tax clearance showing they're in good standing.
At the conclusion of my presentation, I would ask that Mr. Ozcon virtually raise his hand
and then I'll get sworn in and I'll have a few questions for him to answer.
So the notice of refusal.
Yes, this is an RSA 5 property.
This lot is exactly 2,480 square feet.
This is a humongous lot.
And if you notice, the only refusal we have is for the use, the proposed use of three-family dwelling.
there are no dimensional variances at all for this property and there should not be because
of the largeness of the lot and if you look at the the mill creek advisory council uh you know
they said uh let's see uh the only note that they have is no during the meeting residents
questioned dimensions of project lot the developers and their team reported that they
would look at the survey and deed of the property for accurate dimensions. We did. There's nothing
wrong with the dimensions of our lot. Again, there were a few individuals in the audience
and there weren't many. And the only issue they had was that they didn't want any development on
their lot. They live next door and they wanted this as open space and they didn't understand
why there would be any development. And I explained to them that, yes, we're seeking
variance, but we are allowed to build something here. We just can't afford to build something
here given the economics of the situation with interest rates, close to double figures for
investment properties like this, as well as construction costs. It's just not economically
feasible for us to build a single family structure here. And we're asking for three units, which we
believe it's the least modification necessary to fulfill the goals of my client as well as the
spirit of the Philadelphia zoning code. And then it's not out of character to have multifamily
structures that have been approved by this zoning board. 4913 Haverford Avenue, which is a much
smaller lot, was approved for two-family household living. Our lot is, I believe, twice the size of
best scene. And then you also can see that 4801 Fairmont Avenue, again, a much smaller lot was
approved for multifamily use. As well as 5024 Ray Street, again, much smaller lot was approved for
three-family dwelling use. And then 5110 Haverford Avenue, which is again, a much smaller lot than
ours was three uh three family use and then 5108 haverford a much smaller lot was approved for two
families and then maps of the area you can see we're not in a like a just a sole single family
district here yes our block you know there it's rsa5 but there's a ton of rm1 rm2 we're across
the street from chop but even within the yellow a lot of those projects we're talking about
But even within the yellow, a lot of those projects we were talking about were the ones that this zoning board under similar circumstances approved for multifamily use with lots much smaller than ours.
for the ones that
So having a 2400, almost 2500 square foot lot, it's virtually impossible to be able to afford to build a single family house here.
And then we are close by with public transportation, as you can see with, you know, all of the little signs that show buses.
so we have a humongous you know about we have an ability to have you know public transportation here
and then photographs of the property so this is our property uh we're between um uh again uh you
know structures that have been there for a while but our lot's been vacant for some time as you can
see from this you know picture that as you know google earth goes as far back as july of 2007 or
or just 2007. And this has been a vacant lot for almost now 17 years. And this is our property.
So we go street to street from Haverford to Wallace. So this is from the rear of the property
on Wallace. And again, just again from 2007, you can see that this has been a vacant lot on both
sides, both on Haverford Avenue as well as Wallace Street. And then again, proof of posting for
today's hearing from Haverford as well as from Wallace. And then this is Haverford to the right
of the property. And this is Haverford to the left of the property. This is Waller Street to
the right of the property. And this is Waller Street to the left of the property. And then
again, my client takes great pride in the construction and the quality of materials
they use so i always try to provide examples of kitchens and living rooms and and bathrooms and
bedrooms and then our plans and drawings as you can just see here first of all this is a regular
shaped lot i mean it's it's almost like an elbow here um so it makes it very difficult you know
generally to build anything but you can see how much open area we have it's just a very very very
very large lot and again it goes from Haverford all the ways to Wallace and then what we try to
do was emulate basically what the properties next to us have like a porch so we we really
try to mimic that look and feel we try to have like a flat brick building facade
lintels windows that you would expect uh from uh from homes in this area and then and a distinct
cornice line as well and then again because of you know the largeness of the lot you know we have
really large uh units here unit number one is the first floor and lower level is almost 2,000 square
feet. Unit number two is a two-bedroom, two-bath over 1,000 square feet. Unit number three, which
is on the third floor, is also a two-bedroom, two-bath over 1,000 square feet. So we're not
trying to cram in a ton of units into a small lot or in a small building structure. Each of these
units are on its own floor. And there's enough room out there for people to enjoy the rest of
the property and have a sense of community per property that has not been developed in over 17
years and in our RCO meeting notice we met with community earlier this year 62 addresses were
notified in the meeting these are listed the addresses proof of mailing to those addresses
our application for appeal that we filed on behalf of Pebble Development LLC notice of refusal that
went along with that application for appeal our project information form our deed to the property
showing a pebble development llc is the owner of the property and then finally a certificate of
tax claimants showing that they're in good standing with the city of philadelphia so
with that being said i'm going to unshare my screen and i would ask that mr oscon virtually
raise his hand and be sworn in
Do we see him?
Chair, right now, go ahead.
I'm sorry, go ahead, Jason.
Nicole Kershaw, with her hand raised,
we'll allow them to speak at this time.
Hi, could you state your name, please,
and spell for the court stenographer?
My name is Nicole Kershaw.
Hello?
Hello?
Hello?
Hello?
Yeah, hi.
Yeah, hi.
Is this the owner of the property?
Is this the owner of the property?
Yes, I'm the owner of $48.31 forever.
You live next door?
Yes, directly next door.
Okay, so let me try to get the owner first,
and I'm going to get right back to you, okay?
Is the owner in the audience?
Excuse me, Mr. Chair, I have another hand.
and race, but they put it down.
I don't believe that was the individual in question.
Mr. Nockamson, do you think he's not here?
He was supposed to be here.
I don't see why not.
I'll have Mr. Goldberg text him while we're waiting,
and maybe you can take some questions from the community.
I want to try to do this in order first,
like let the board get in and then go to the audience when it's time.
Look, you're an officer of the court.
We'll gladly take your testimony.
I appreciate it.
Questions from the board?
No, Mr. Chairman.
No, Chair.
No, Chair.
Questions or comments from our attorney, Hillary Emerson?
Not at this time, Mr. Chair.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
Let them know that it's on right now.
Mr. Chair, I have a Kiara Mathis with their hand raised.
I've allowed them to speak at this time.
Hi, could you state your name, please, and spell for the court stenographer?
Hi, my name is Kiara Mathias.
My name is spelled K-Y-A-I-R-R-A.
Last name is M-A-T-H-I-E-S.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Are you a neighbor?
Yes, I am the owner of 4827 Haverford Avenue.
Okay, please proceed, ma'am.
Yes, so I have made a letter of refusal for the building of the property for 4829.
I was not able to attend the last meeting, but I did submit a letter of my contestant against the property.
um we've asked that they provide the actual dimensions that they actually came out to
re-evaluate the property in order for them to build it would have to be 16 um 15 to 16 feet
or more and according to our dimensions that's not what it is so we've asked them to provide
that proof in order to be able to build and um when we had our assessors come out it's less than
15 feet um so we are just totally against that because when the city first demolished the
property um they tore all that uh stuff down on my property never stuckled it never put it back
i had to spend 16 000 to put the wall back up and to have someone come out and rebuild against the
wall that they tore down i'm utterly against it number two is that there is a fire hydrant right
on the property. When the construction company comes out to build, where are they going to come
in with the supplies at? Are they going to put it on my property? Are they going to put it on next
door? Because there is nowhere for them to put that construction items. Number three, they're
trying to, I believe, build also on the corner some type of apartment complex. So the neighborhood
is single-family neighborhood with the maybe one or two apartments on the block. There is no way
to have all these multi-families come in and be able to live accurately on the block. So that,
I'm just incontestant of it. I don't want to hold the court too much, but I just wanted to make that
clear. We appreciate you taking the time. Is there anyone else in the virtual audience?
um yes mr chair there is a nicole kershaw i have allowed them to speak at this time
okay hi could you state your name please it's spelled for the court stenographer
my name is nicole kerson nicole n-i-c-o-l-e k-e-r-s-h-a-w right do you swear or affirm
to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the
truth. I do.
Please proceed. Are you a neighbor?
Yes, I am. I am
the adjoining property
at 4831
Kevin Smith. Okay. All right. Please
proceed. So,
like whoever you're saying,
there definitely is a problem
because, number one,
the dimensions are not
as they are
as they are
recording, okay? I understand
according. Okay? I understand these houses
these houses were built a long time ago
were built along
and, you know, whatever they were doing,
whatever they were doing, but the recordings are
not accurate because actually
my property is bigger
than what it has been recorded. I just
need to try to scrape up some money
so I can get somebody to come out and do a
survey because I don't want to be
in coastal. Second of all,
if they decide to build,
they're going to build an apartment.
It's a single family
excuse me mr chair excuse me and excuse me ma'am uh i don't know if the court your your um
your speech is a bit muffled i'm thinking maybe an issue with your audio and i'm not sure that
the court reporter is able to follow everything that you're saying i want to speak a little bit
slower okay i'm sorry sorry as i say
ma'am ma'am ma'am we're having a hard time we understand do you have your mouth i'm sorry chair
is your mouth too close to the speaker or the microphone because you're muffling and we're
recording this and have a court reporter we can't understand you clearly so if you can do that that
would be very helpful. I'm sorry, Terry.
You can continue. No, no, no. It's fine.
It's fine.
Try again.
Ma'am,
you have to unmute yourself.
Can you hear me now?
We can. It's a little better.
What was I saying?
My hands have been
a little tight.
Ma'am,
we're having a hard time hearing you again.
I think we we listen to me. We know where you live. We understand where you are.
You're not happy with the dimensions and you're against the project. Is that correct?
Yes. OK, so. Thank you for calling in. I think we understand everything you have to say.
Thank you very much. Is there anyone else in the virtual audience?
No further hands, Mr. Chair.
by planning commission um go on you i only said mr goldberg i'm sorry alan but see yeah so i just
want to respond uh again all the issues uh that they have raised are essentially non-zoney related
issues the dimensions of the property excuse me the art plans are based on field conditions
and construction as well are not zoney related which we'll deal with if there's a fire hydrant
on our land, we'll obviously have to deal with that with both L&I as well as the fire department.
And there are other examples of multifamily use. Again, 4913 Haverford, 5110 Haverford,
5108 Haverford, and some adjoining streets like 5024, race 4801 Fairmont. I mean, this is a lot
that's over almost 2500 square feet in size uh so that's where we stand all right thank you very
much planning commission good afternoon chair sorry camera good afternoon chair peter bernard
for the planning commission please please the plan recommends no change to the existing rsa
five residential single family zoning at this location there is no unique physical condition
or circumstance of this property that would prevent it being used in conformance with the
zoning code this is primarily single family block so multi-family dwelling would be out of character
and neither having a lot that is too large nor financing is a recognized hardship accordingly
the city planning commission recommends the board deny the proposed use variance for three dwelling
Thank you. Mr. Nockham said we've heard some testimony on this.
I really want to spend some time talking in an executive session with the board.
We will vote on this next Wednesday at 2 p.m.
Thank you. Thank you very much. And I think I have another case of yours right now.
So MI 2023-005-130-1707
Master Street.
There is an opposition from the neighbors, but an application provided a petition.
The applicant provided a petition and support signed by 52 neighbors.
Mr. Chair, I'm sorry to interrupt.
This is Hillary.
Regarding that last case, 4828 at Oxford Avenue.
It's closed.
Yes, the record is closed.
Yes, we have a question about that.
Everything's closed other than a vote.
Yep, yep.
Yep, thank you.
Mr. Nockerman, just for the record, state your name.
Alan Nocklinson.
Alan Nocklinson.
And could you also...
And could you also identify your client, the relationship to the property?
1707 Master Street, owner LP, and the individual audience should be its representative, Nathan Ward.
Our vice chair has a few questions.
All right.
Good afternoon, counsel.
Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal or stipulation to relate to his accuracy?
have you emailed then all the required documents and exhibits that is needed and required to
proceed with this case have these in advance of this hearing yes we have thank you please
proceed and share your screen okay i'm here to present 1707 master street you're seeing this
screen right let me show this yeah hold on a second sorry i'm like this is not my computer
so i'm not as familiar uh with this um you know this setup that mr goldberg has okay
hopefully you see my screen of 1707 master street um again while we don't have community
full community support here in terms of an rco letter there was a split vote at with within the
community uh meeting uh and we did do extensive extensive uh reach out to the community uh in
general by way of a petition and letters to support where you'll see we actually have letters to
support of 1703 05 and 09 master street so there is a great amount of support for this uh matter
So we'll first review the notice of refusal, which will behind it include an advertisement.
My client purchased this property thinking that this was an eight-unit dwelling.
After trying to get their rental licenses, they realized only five units are allowed as of right and by way of the zoning permit.
And that's why we're here today.
They didn't do anything wrong.
And even the community would agree, and if Mr. Harris from the community group is here, the United Neighbors Alliance Civic Association, I think he would confirm that the opposition by the community has more to do with the frustration of the community with the actual previous property owner, who apparently increased the amount of units in the property without governmental approval.
But you'll see the advertisement that we relied on, that we thought this was eight units.
But then you'll review, we'll also review the correspondence from the United Neighbors
Alliance Civic Association.
It was not a well-attended meeting, and it was a split vote.
But there were more people who voted against the project than for it.
Then you'll review, we will review the petition that we circulated in the community.
And you'll see it by way of a map that, again, we really focus on the people that will be most directly impacted by this project.
And then specifically, we have letters of support from direct neighbors who are supportive of this increase in amount of units.
Again, it's not like we did this, you know, we created this problem, we found out about this problem, and we're trying to legalize this structure.
In addition, there are three units in this building that, you know, if this board does not grant this extension of the amount of units, we're going to have to pick three households in this building, which would be unfortunate.
So, again, we're hoping, you know, that the board sees that we don't have unclean hands.
It makes sense to have eight units in this building.
we also provide as part of our presentation the use permit showing that you know there are five
units here allowed this is an r1 property we're not trying to convert an rsa5 property into
multifamily you know multifamily is allowed it's just not eight units but five and we're trying
to legalize this situation and then we'll look at the zoning map and showing that we're in a
multifamily district uh photographs of the property in the surrounding area um our interior photos
just generally showing like you know our units um mr knockinson i'm sorry i maybe it's just me but
i'm only seeing the desktop screen i'm not seeing the exhibit packet correct hillary okay so i
apologize for that i thought you were still looking for it myself oh i'm sorry i'm again
i'm like kind of at a disadvantage here don't know how to use this computer so um sound like
an old fogey uh do you see it now it's not now okay great um that's helpful uh then we'll review
the plans and drawings you know these are existing conditions our rco meeting notice
our RCO meeting notice, our application for appeal, our deeds of property, and a certificate of tax
or applications for appeal or deeds of property and a certificate
clearance. Again, at the conclusion of my presentation, I would ask that Mr. Ward
virtually raise his hand, be sworn in, and I'll have a few questions for him.
All right. Alex? Oh, I got it. I think I got it now. I think I'm good. All right. So notice of
refusal uh again we're just trying to increase the amount of legal units from five units to eight
and this is the advertisement i just pulled it off of the internet um but specifically if you
look here and i apologize if you can't see that well i don't want to mess around with expanding
the screen and contracting the screen but i'll read it it's just about this home incredible
investment opportunity to acquire eight full eight fully leased units at temple university
at a 7.65 cap rate there's all this other information about there but that's what my
client relied upon right it was advertised as eight to him and then this you know this is just
i just did a printout of the listing this is not anything that's worthwhile to the board but that
description is what he relied upon to purchase this property and then you know the correspondence from
the united neighbors alliance civic association there were eight members of the community at
the uh at the community meeting five from the general community three from the rco board
two two of the members of the community voted in support six voted in opposition mr goldberg is
the one who presented this in front of the community. And when he came back, we thought
we were fine. There was no one who said, oh, my God, this is a horrible project. This is
unrealistic. Why is there eight units here? We thought we were going to get a letter of
non-opposition. Out of the blue, we, you know, again, got this letter. We reached out to
Mr. Harris, who heads the community group here. And, you know, their group is always fair.
You know, so bluntly, they stated that they were just very upset with the previous property owner.
And honestly, L&I to allow the situation to happen.
I said, I completely understand, except my client purchased this property expecting eight units there.
And it was advertised as such.
So that's, you know, and there are eight households within this structure.
So three of those households are going to be very unhappy if we don't get, you know, disapproval today.
but you know we made a really concern and it wasn't a well-attended meeting and and we presented
in front of of this neighborhood a lot so we know the individuals in this in this neighborhood and
there's a a very dedicated like amount of individuals in this neighborhood to show up
every meeting but none of those people really live nearby the people that live nearby are the
ones who signed our petition again 1703 05 and 09 master all in support this is our property and
these are all the people in support and there are other signatures that we have i try to limit the
signatures to people within the affected area i tell my clients here's the list that we have to
send notice of the community meeting to stay within that list to get if you're going to get
letters or petitions to support and this is what we're showing here by way of this map and then
here's the actual signatures again we really try to make sure our clients get
the addresses of the individuals and contact information so people can
verify like these people actually exist and then specifically we asked the
individuals at 1703 1705 and 1709 who live there to sign a separate letter of
support, which they did, showing their support for this matter. Again, this already exists,
this building structure, the way it is. No one's ever complained. There's no violations against
the property. My client just wants to legalize this. And then here's the use permit. So the
previous owner got a use permit for five dwelling units, but it was advertised to us as eight.
And then here's maps of the area. It's not like we're taking an RSA 5 property and convert it
into multifamily this is as orange of a neighborhood as one would get
and then you know we're not that far up a broad street there's ample public transportation whether
it's a broad street line and there's many bus lines so it's expected for this to be an apartment
building and then photographs to the property proof of of the notice poster being posted to
the property for today's hearing here's master street to the right of the property
Here's Master Street to the right of the property, Master Street to the left of the property.
master street to the left of the property
And there are photographs.
I just, you know, I told my client, can you just give me a couple of photographs showing, you know, here's the amount of mailboxes.
My client, no one's ever hid the amount of, like, units in this property.
It's just because my client tried to get a rental license, they realized they can't get for eight and they want to do everything legitimately.
And so we're hoping that the board agrees and allows them to use the property legally for eight units.
and then our plans and drawings again no structural changes no changes in configuration
of the building structure or the units themselves we have four floors and eight units you know it's
a responsible use of this property and you know here's our meeting notice and proof of email to
the to the rcos as well as the district council members zoning aid of the hearing excuse me of
community meeting and then we mailed this notice to 124 addresses so it was a lot of addresses
we mailed to and no one within the affected area voted for this or against it and these are the
addresses proof of mailing to those addresses our applications for appeal that we filed on behalf
of 1707 master street owner lp and then our deeds of property showing that they own the property
And then most importantly, they they're complying with the city in terms of real estate taxes.
With that being said, I'm going to unshare my screen.
I can get to it.
There we go, I think.
Alan, was there separate utilities there?
I think so.
I think that I don't know if water is separate, but the other utilities, electric.
I don't know if there's gas.
i would ask mr i don't want to state that but definitely electric i don't know if there's gas
in the building but i would ask that mr ward testify to that sure okay
mr ward
mr ward if you're in the virtual audience please raise your hand
Jason, do we see him?
No, Mr. Chair, not present.
Okay, Alan, we're going to accept your testimony.
Questions from the board?
No, Mr. Chairman.
No, Chair.
Questions or comments from our attorney, Hillary?
Not at this time, Mr. Chair.
questions or comments from the virtual audience
i do not see any hands mr chair planning commission
good afternoon chair peter bernard for the planning commission
the comprehensive plan recommends a change in zoning at this location to rsa 5 single family
residential we feel the applicant has demonstrated sufficient hardship accordingly the planning
commission recommends the board grant the proposed variance for eight dwelling units thank you
mi 2023-005-130-1707 master street i vote yes
thomas holloman my vote is yes
ishmael shaheed my vote is yes thank you counsel thank you have a great day okay number 10
I think we might have had a hiccup. Please hold.
Yes, please hold. I believe we lost a cheer. We'll be back shortly.
am I back
yes you are Mr. Bergman
okay good
2327 Cotman Avenue
Leonard Altieri is the attorney
for the tenant
recommendation of support from
Ron Hurst Civic Association
reporting a RCO
and letter of support from
community on the rise. Mr. Chair, can you read the MI number into the record again, please?
Thank you. Sure. Okay. MI 2023-005-045.
M-I-2023-005-045.
That's 2327 Cotman Avenue.
Hi, Mr. Altieri.
How are you, sir?
Hi, could you say these and spell for the court stenographer?
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.
Right.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Would you identify your client and the relationship to this property?
My client is Raising Cane's Restaurant LLC, and they are the tenant of the property.
Right.
And our vice chair has just a few questions for you, sir.
Good afternoon, counsel.
Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal or stipulate towards accuracy?
Have you emailed in all the required documents and exhibits that is needed to proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing?
uh i did and then i supplemented that um uh with counsel
are you there
i think we lost him yeah i think so
he should come right back i'll see if i can bring him back sir okay
Okay, he will be rejoining as a panelist.
Thank you.
Welcome.
You're back.
All right, thank you.
Sorry about that.
Please proceed.
I got disconnected.
So as I was saying, I did, Mr. Vice Chairman, provide the documents,
and then there was two documents that were supplemented yesterday with the council.
As long as we received them.
Please proceed.
Thank you very much.
okay can you see the screen you've got to open at we're good now thank you you can see perfect okay
so as i said mr chairman i'm here today uh for the property located 2327 cotman ave the client
is raising canes restaurant llc uh based in baton rouge louisiana raising canes is a chicken finger
restaurant that serves chicken fingers and chicken fingers only. As part of their nationwide
expansion, my client is building currently under construction a restaurant at the Roosevelt Mall,
essentially in the parking lot, which is being shown on the screen right here where my cursor is.
We're here this evening or this afternoon for a variance for the installation of a pre-sale menu
board. Under the zoning code, we are allowed two menu boards. What my client is seeking is a third
menu board that would be used for pre-sale, which I'll explain in greater detail. The property,
as I alluded to, is located on the Roosevelt Mall parcel, and the property is in the CA2
zoning district. So again, this is where the Raising Canes is currently under construction,
right here at Roosevelt Mall. The bottom road right here is Cotman Ave.
This is the actual engineering plan, again, just showing the Raising Canes right here.
this is where it will be once constructed as a satellite
this is the current construction that that is uh taking place as noted we're here uh with regards
to uh the installation of one statically illuminated menu board which would bring
the total amount on the property to three whereas under the zoning code we're only permitted
two. The pre-sale menu board will be located at the beginning of the drive-through. It is
essentially just to inform customers of what is on the menu so that they can make their selection
mentally before they pull up to the actual menu board and place it with a customer. The menu
board is consistent with the national brand of Raising Canes with regards to the color scheme
name, and size, which is shown here. And again, the only relief we're seeking this afternoon is
for this one to be installed. Everything else is compliant under the zoning code. It's just
the number of signs. The coordinating RCO for this property is the Ron Hurst Community Association,
Ron Hurst Civic Association. We did meet with them where they gave us a vote of approval.
One of the affected RCOs is Community on the Rise, who reached out to myself.
We took them on a site visit on October 21st with members of the RCO, and they then also issued a letter of support as well.
The letter is here and their vote total as well.
The denial of this requested variance would result in an unnecessary hardship.
the proposed sign is compliant with regards to the dimensional criteria and we're only seeking
The proposed sign is compliant with regards to the dimensional criteria, and we're only
seeking a variance for the installation of this third menu board, which will serve as
a pre-sale menu board to keep customer traffic and flow moving through the drive-through
Accordingly, the relief requested is the least minimum variance that will afford relief
under the existing CA2 zoning district.
If granted, this variance will not increase congestion in the neighborhood, injure the
appropriate use of adjacent properties, or impair adequate supply of light and air to
the neighboring properties. And lastly, if granted, this variance will not alter the essential
character of the neighborhood, nor will it be detrimental to the general welfare. I have with
me this afternoon from Raising Keynes, Melissa Brochel, who I would just ask to be promoted to
a panelist. Okay. I forgot them to speak. Hi, could you state your name, please? Is
spelled for the court stenographer, please? Sure. My name is Melissa Brochel, M-E-L-I-S-S-A,
And my last name is Brochul, B-R-O-T-S-C-H-U-L.
I'm with Raising Cane's.
Do you swear to firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Yes, sir.
You see, counsel.
Thank you very much.
Melissa, you are authorized to speak on behalf of Raising Cane's Restaurant LLC.
Yes, that's correct.
And were you on the call when you heard me go through my testimony?
Yes, that's correct.
And the testimony that I provided, is it true and accurate to the best of your knowledge and belief?
Yes, it is.
And if I called you to testify, would you adopt that testimony as yourself?
Yes, I would.
Thank you very much.
I also have Mr. Chairman Jennifer Squires from AGI, who is a sign manufacturer.
I think if anybody has any questions, we'll bring the sign manufacturer on, okay?
Okay, that's fine.
Okay, questions from the board?
No, Mr. Chairman.
no no chair thank you questions or comments from our attorney hillary emerson
not at this time mr chair questions or comments from the virtual audience
yes mr chair i have alice udovich with their hand raised i have a lot to speak
at this time good afternoon alice could you just state your name and spell for the court
stenographer certainly good afternoon chairman members of the board alice udovich u-d-o-v-i-c-h
on behalf of councilman brian o'neill do you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth
nothing but the truth i do please proceed the councilman has no objection to the granting of
variance at this location thank you thank you very much is there anyone else in the virtual audience
I don't see any further hands.
Planning commission.
Good afternoon, chair.
Peter Bernard for the planning commission.
The comprehensive plan recommends no change to the commercial
area to zoning at this location.
The appellant requests one additional sign more than the zoning code allows.
the appellant property is part of the shopping center where a reasonable person would expect
to find multiple signs on property accordingly the planning commission recommends the board
grant the proposed variance from the sign requirements in the zoning code thank you
MI 2023-005-045-2327 Cotman Avenue I vote yes Thomas Holloman my vote is yes
thank you counsel thank you very much mr chairman okay number 12 mi 2023
005 337 99 95 east roosevelt boulevard michael mattione is the attorney
um a letter of support from councilman o'neill a letter of non-opposition from walton park
civic association
they will be rejoining as a panel
Mr. Mattione?
Mr. Mattiotti, are you still in a virtual audience?
It was promoted to panelists, sir.
I don't know what happened.
Let's wait and see.
Maybe he got washed out here.
Hello, Mr. Chair.
I have Mr. Mattiotti on the phone.
He's trying to get back in.
Okay, we're good.
Yeah, we're fine.
Thank you.
Thank you.
do we think zoom's having a problem today or yes maybe cheers seems like we've been having
issues a lot of people have been knock them and just disappeared at one point right
so it's totally your call we can just wait a couple
um or move forward it's totally the cheers well this is the last one on the right yes so
we can't we can't help can we hold that to later hillary
mr chair if you'd like we could take um a brief recess now and resume with this case
let's take five minutes that's a great idea i thank you okay
Okay. So I'll go one more time. So MI 2023-005-337-9995 East Roosevelt Boulevard. Michael Mattione is the attorney. There's a letter of non-oppositions from Walton Park Civic Association, a letter of support from Councilman O'Neill. Mr. Mattione, could you state your name and spell for the court reporter?
Michael Mattione.
That's M-A-T-T-I-O-N-I.
Do you swear a firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Could you identify your clients, their relationship to the property?
Certainly.
Biagio DeSimone, he's the owner of the property, and he's also the owner of Kia on the Boulevard,
which is the tenant at the property.
And he's with me behind me.
Our vice chair has just a few questions.
good afternoon counsel do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal or stipulate to his
accuracy i do have you emailed in all the required documents and exhibits that is needed and required
to proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing yes thank you please proceed
counsel to share your screen certainly
i've got all messed up when i got i'm sorry mr sheriff that's okay that's okay it's fine
you know because it got all messed up when i um had to log back in so now i can't tell you you're
not the only person in our time today so yeah oh i saw that i'm sorry hold on i gotta
bring it back up. I apologize about that. I had to bring it now. Is that all?
no no no no sir
it's coming up coming up it's up you're up thank you thank you sorry about that um again uh
representing uh mr de simone who's the owner of uh 99.95 east resovel boulevard and we did submit
in advance of the hearing, our tax payment confirmation, the letter from the Civic Association,
letter of support from Council Member O'Neill, a revised site plan, a revised plans form,
renderings, site plans, floor plans, photographs. Keyon Boulevard has been operating since 2008
and this property has been an automobile showroom since about 2003. In 2010, a variance was obtained
to add a service facility to the auto showroom. Kia on the Boulevard is now planning to upgrade
its facility, the showroom and service facility, and Kia itself is requiring certain upgrades
to this facility, and the changes mean that we need a variance. The changes include addition of
service intake area and a new six new service base. Kia is specifically requiring the increase
from the 13 service bays to 19 service bays and also to have a specific service bay for electric
cars there will be a new facade added we're actually increasing the square footage of the
building by 5163 square feet it's an increase in the gross floor area of the building from 22
2,403 square feet to 27,915 square feet, which is less than 25%, and that'll be important
for a minute, as I will explain in a minute. We're going from 199 parking spaces to 168
with the changes. Again, the taxes are paid. The main refusal
is 143036A2, which is because we want to expand the use that we already have a variance for.
The accessory bicycle parking, we no longer need a variance to. We made changes in the plans,
and that's why we have the revised site plan and the revised plans form. We were originally going
to increase by a little more than 25%. We're actually now increasing the four-year by only
23 percent and as you can see when we had more than 25 we needed to have bicycle spaces we're
under 25 percent so we no longer need that refusal uh there's our um non-opposition letter from the
civic association a letter of support from council member o'neill this is the site as you can see
it's red line road in the boulevard you have the existing showroom the existing service facility
This is the proposed addition to the showroom, and this is the proposed addition to the service facility, and there's a new proposed stair addition.
This building alone, just this one building, is two stories.
In addition, there's a whole bunch of landscaping and other improvements to the site.
And this is our revised plans form.
We're decreasing the building coverage by 264 square feet, decreasing the proposed additional building area by 2,900 square feet, reducing parking stalls by 10, decreasing the parking lot open area, and the decrease means that we no longer need the variance for not having bicycle parking.
This is a rendering of what the facility will look like.
This part is the new service intake area attached to the showroom.
And the showroom will have all new facade, all new windows, new lettering.
And this is all being dictated by IKEA.
This is another colorized site plan just showing the greening that will happen of the site.
The additions are the darker colors.
That's the existing, that's six additional service bays, additional service intake area.
so you pull in off the boulevard and you bring your car in here and they will serve it they will
if you need service you drop it off all representatives here come out and pick up the
cars additional trees and everything are on the site and this is just the existing site plan and
the proposed site plan showing the additions to the building the additional trees and landscaping
that were mandated by the zoning code and just we'll improve the site if this gets approved
this is the floor plan the first floor plan this is existing this is existing
this is the new that's no there's also a car detailing area added
This is the new, that's new.
There's also a car detailing area added.
Again, the service intake.
And the second floor of the service area,
everything else is one floor.
And this is parts, office area, training facility,
that kind of stuff.
Elevations just showing the rear up on the boulevard.
The site, looking at it from Red Lion Road.
Additional elevations, again, from the boulevard, what you'd see, and from Redline Road.
This is a letter from Kia USA, where they tell Mr. DeSimone that he has to have 19 service bays,
and including one that's an electric vehicle bay.
And he only has 13 now.
The only way he can get up to 19 is to expand the building.
You expand the building, you need a variance.
If you want to keep your key of dealership, you need to get the variance or else you will lose your key of dealership.
This is a Google Earth just showing it's an irregularly shaped lot, triangular lot on the corner.
It's got a school behind it, an office building over here.
This is off of the boulevard, what you see right now.
This will all be renovated and modified.
That's the service building.
This is the showroom building.
this will go and be replaced by the new service intake area. Again, some additional photos looking
at it from the boulevard. That facade will all be modified. This is from Red Lion Road.
Again, Red Lion Road, the facade of that building will also be modified.
Looking down Red Lion Road, again from the boulevard. This is the interior of the building,
which will also be renovated. This is the showroom floor. This is the service area, as you can see.
This is across Roosevelt Boulevard, the shopping center across the street,
gas station across the street, additional shopping center on the other side of Red Lion Road,
the office building directly across from Red Lion Road.
so um this is what they're seeking to do um we have support from the community we have support
from the council member the variances are necessary if the key of dealership is to survive
they have to upgrade they have to increase the size of the building they have to increase
and they have to renovate it and bring it into a more modern building again this is what we
blend up with, better landscaping, better facade, better lights. And this property's been a
dealership building and service facility for more than 20 years. It really can't be converted to
another use. You need the variance, though, in order for it to be able to remain viable as an
auto dealership with a service facility. Again, Kia is also mandating this, but Mr. DeSimone
will be renovating it regardless because it's been here for 20 years and needs to be renovated
to meet the market requirement and again the zoning is ca1 it doesn't allow this use
it's been here for a long time and the only way to remain here and viable and with this use and
you really can't convert it to another use given what it's been used for all these years so you
need the variances and there are minor variances dimensional variances um they're considered a use
But the really dimensional variance is to increase the size of the building and you still have a very large lot.
So we believe that we should be granted the variances requested.
And I do have Mr. DeSimone with me.
So, Gene.
Mr. Chairman.
Hi, Mr. DeSimone.
Could you please state your name and spell for the court stenographer?
Biagio DeSimone.
B-I-A-G-I-O.
DeSimone, D-E-S-I-M-O-N-E.
Right.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Proceed, counsel.
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you.
Did you hear my comments and statements?
Are they true and correct?
Do you adopt them as your testimony?
Mr. Chair, we do also have Rustin O'Hara, our architect.
If anybody has any questions about the design.
If I have any questions, we'll bring him on.
Questions from the board.
no mr chairman questions or comments from our attorney hillary emerson
not at this time mr chair questions or comments from the virtual audience
i do not see any hands at this time mr chair planning commission
good afternoon chair peter bernard for the planning commission
good afternoon chair peter bernard for the planning commission
the comprehensive plan recommends no change to the commercial area one zoning at this location
the proposed use auto sales and maintenance is a documented documented uh documentation of
illegal non-conformity the variance is not including bicycle parking is portable due to
the dangers for cyclists inherent to the use accordingly the planning commission recommends
the board grant the proposed variances for auto sales and maintenance and for not including
bicycle parking. Thank you. MI 2023-005-337-9995 East Roosevelt Boulevard. I vote yes with proviso.
Revised plans, one-page, stamped by ZBA on December 13, 2023. Thomas Holliman, my vote is yes with
proviso ishno shahi my vote is yes with proviso counsel you have your votes thank you very much
thank you mr chair thank you thank you for your patience all right thank you sir
is there anyone in the virtual audience whose 2 p.m case has not been called
i do not see any hints mr chair okay we're going to move to the 330 list
Good afternoon. My name is Bill Bergman, and I will be chairing this afternoon's list.
With me is our Vice Chair, Ismail Shahid.
Present, Mr. Chairman.
Our Board Member, Thomas Holloman.
Present, Mr. Chairman.
Also, here is Hillary Emerson, our Attorney, and our Executive Director, Tanya Sunket.
Here's our virtual format.
Be advised, the proceedings are being recorded.
Video will be available by contacting tanyasunket at phil.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.
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 Sunkett.
Let's look at what we have on this afternoon's list.
Mr. Chair, this is Hillary. Just two quick notes. One, I believe Mr. Snell is joining us a little bit later. Is that correct?
He is. He will.
Okay, I just want to note that for the record. And then I know we're going to go to number nine first. If we could go to number two after number nine, that would be great. And then we'll go through the list, the rest of the list as listed. Thank you.
Okay, so let's do our continuance first. Number four, MI-2022-007-225-6644 Linford Road, request for that, that case has been continued.
Number seven, MI 2023-005-097-4329 Glendale.
That case is continued.
And number 12, MI-2023-002-925-2126-East-32-32-East-Somerset, that case is continued.
Are there any other requests for continuances?
Mr. Chair, I have a call-in user.
Okay. Call in user number two with the hand raised. I have allowed them to speak at this time.
Okay. Hi, could you state your name, please, and spell it for the court stenographer?
Hi. My name is Tiffany Green, concerned citizen of Point Breeze, RCO. And I wanted to request a continuance for 1546-48 South 20th Street.
the developer and attorney
was supposed to come back
and meet with the community
you're going to have to speak up Tiffany I'm not hearing you well
oh you can't hear me okay I'm sorry
they were
supposed to come back and meet
with the community and
there was no vote taken and
so we feel that they should complete their
meeting with us
hold on let me get
their counsel
Jennifer Bedstillo please
Hi, Mr. Chairman.
Hi, could you state your name, please, and spell for the court's knock?
Sure. Jennifer Bzidlow, B as in boy, A as in apple, Z as in zebra, Y, D as in David, L as in Larry, O as in Oscar.
Right. You swear for them to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
You swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
Did you hear the request for continuous?
Yes, and I would object to that. We left the meeting. I was going to talk more about this
in my presentation, but at the end of the meeting, the RCO had asked if we could make some changes
to the plans. I discussed it with my client, and the next day I emailed the coordinating RCO
and said that we would not be making any plans.
I asked them if they wanted us to come back specifically
and then followed up again with them on November 13th.
And they said they did not want us to come back
if we were not making changes to the plan.
So we're going to go on with the case.
Jennifer, you'll get a chance to explain.
Tiffany, Tiffany, Tiffany, listen to me.
We're going to go on with the case.
You will have ample opportunity to respond
when I open it up to the audience, okay?
thank you
you can proceed Mr. Chair
okay good
and I also have let's see here I have to do one
number 11
MI 2023
M.I. 2023. Pardon me? M.I. 2023. Mr. France has the hand raised. Who's that?
Chair, we have his hand raised. He's been unmuted and allowed to speak.
Okay. Could you state your name, please, and spell for the course sonographer?
Good evening, Mr. Chairman and fellow board members. Yes, that's France Pierre,
Pierre, F-R-A-N-T-Z, last name Pierre, P-I-E-R-R-E.
Right. You swear for him to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
What case are you calling about, sir?
Yes, so I am calling in reference to 1546 through 48 South 20th Street.
The RCR, the coordinating RCO, 23rd CDC, did notify me this morning that they did not get a chance to vote on the appeal
because they were looking to work with the applicant some more.
So they would like for a continuance.
And should you hear the appeal this evening, Chairman,
I would, at this time, we would have to oppose it,
being that the community did not get a chance to vote on it.
Okay, so what we're going to do is we're going to go on with the case,
and Tiffany Green will have a chance to come back on and present her issues.
uh that's fine but tiffany's not uh tiffany's uh organization is not the coordinating rco
okay so so the question is will you come back on and testify at the same time
myself or anybody from your organization well i'm from the council person's office
for me i'm from the council person's office can you honor john okay fine but we're going to go
with the case and we're going to take testimony from
whoever's in the audience willing to testify, okay?
The council has already asked
to go on with the case.
Okay, yeah, we would just object
to that and we would ask for them to
go back to the community so they can take an official vote.
Okay, thanks. We're going to go on with the
case and we'll bring that issue up to the table
and we take testimony. Thank you
so much, sir. Thank you.
Is there anyone else in the audience?
no hands, Chair.
All right. And I also have number 11, MI 2023-002-915-1813 North Van Pelt Street.
Jose Bardino is the listed applicant. No exhibits, first listing.
I see no hands, sir.
Okay. That's also the family first development. No one from there either?
no hands mr chair thank you so mi 2023 002 915 1813 north van pelt this is the first listing
next listing mark must be tried
Thank you
Number 9
MI 2023
East Ontario
Street
Solis is the
owner applicant
We also have
an interpreter
interpreter please been allowed to speak
interpreter please raise your virtual hand
Interpreter, please raise your virtual hand.
Almeida Salas has been allowed to speak.
Could you state your name, please, and spell for the court's sonographer?
Mr. Solis, could you state your name and spell for the court stenographer?
Yeah, my name is Almedo Solis Torres.
I live in the 2018 E, Ontario Street, the first piece of Philadelphia.
Excuse me, Chase.
I know, I know, I'm aware.
Do we have our interpreter up yet?
I'm checking now.
Is the interpreter for this case available?
Please raise your virtual hand.
I am sorry, everyone, but I'm not seeing any hands raised.
Hillary, I think we'll have to continue this.
Yes, Mr. Chair, we will need to continue this. Apologies to the applicant. The staff will work on a new date.
We'll make sure we'll try to get you back in as quick as we can, and we'll make sure there's an interpreter here.
I'm sorry. This is Tanya, Chair. Do we have a couple cases scheduled for today? I can try to get someone right away.
We do have a couple cases, yeah.
Okay, let me see if I can try to get somebody right away.
All right, let's go to number two.
MI 2023, 002-920, 429 South 16th Street.
Letter of non-opposition from the Center City Residents Association.
and also
signed by approximately
33 people
and I believe Mr. Cook
Mr. Cook could you state your name please
you've already been sworn
good afternoon Mr. Chairman Harry Cook
for applicant
Mr. Cook could you identify your client
in relationship to the property
Sure. My client is RKPC LLC. And with me today is George Corrine, who is the managing member, as well as property manager, Anita Lance.
Okay. Our vice chair has just a few questions for you, sir.
Good afternoon, counsel. Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal or stipulate towards accuracy?
Yes, I do, sir.
Have you emailed them and all the required documents and exhibits that is needed and required to proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing?
Yes, sir.
Thank you. Please proceed and share your screen.
All right. Thank you so much.
All right. Can everyone see my screen?
Yes, sir.
All right. Wonderful.
So we're here today for 429 South 16th Street.
Everyone is aware of the refusal. It's identified as a use refusal. However, it is more akin to a
dimensional issue. This property is a CMX-1 property. It is located in a block that is
entirely RM-1. Caddy corner to this property is the Independence Charter School, and across the
street is a large physical rehabilitation, and directly across the street on the 16th Street
side is the Chabad Center. This property has two units, residential, second and third floor.
They are currently legal with valid rental licenses. In 1968, this property was granted
use to have a real estate office on the first floor. So we have a property that is demised
out with three units for decades. Let me move over to here is a copy of that use real estate
office and two family from 1968. We are seeking to change the use of that first floor commercial
space to a residential space. It has been on the market for rent as a commercial space since
been on the market for rent as a commercial space since 2020. We've had several showings
and between the size of the office, between post-COVID disinterest in renting space,
it just doesn't fit the Goldilocks zone for commercial space. In addition, folks that have
come to look at it are put off by the fact that there's a school next door etc with that said
many many inquiries have been made over the past several years for residential the space is vacant
it again is at the corner of 16th and Lombard it is a beautiful property
I'm going to go through some of the pictures just so you can see so again we're not here to discuss
the two units above it's just about this commercial space and it's rather de minimis
but for about 170 square feet of lot size this would be a buy right application 170 square feet
so this is the former uh real estate office it runs the first floor and the basement
and these are the current conditions and again it has been vacant and unletable
i'm going to take you up to the plans of what we're proposing
can everyone still see my screen
so first floor as as built presently you come in
It is an open space. You've been through the pictures. You go down to the basement. It's additional open space.
What we're proposing is first floor, kitchen, living room in front, bedroom in the rear, mudroom.
There is an exterior, there's a rear egress going down to the basement, bedroom, front mechanical shared by all three units as it currently is now.
And I'll take you to that room for a better kind of perspective of that basement so you can see where that separation point is.
This is the mechanical room as it currently exists.
That's not going to be part of the living space.
You can see through here the area where that living area would be.
um i have with me um as i said before the property manager if the board is interested
in doing uh some more inquiry regarding um efforts to lease the property she can speak to that
um or the board can take my um my testimony as an officer we'll take your word for it why don't
you have the owner there your client sure sounds good uh i appreciate the brevity
um george korean can you raise your virtual hand and join the meeting
they've been allowed to speak thank you
hello hi hi could you state your name and spell please for the court stenographer
My name is George Corrine. My last name is spelled K-O-R-E-I-N.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Proceed, counsel.
Thank you. Mr. Corrine, did you hear and see my presentation to the zoning board today?
Was it true and accurate to the best of your knowledge and understanding?
do you accept do you adopt it as your own testimony yes thank you sir no more questions
um mr chairman yeah mr cook i i noticed here that the center city residents association have
non-opposition provide the applicant removes or legalizes a parking space i was i was just
going to bring that up oh thank you there is a long-standing um curb cut and space and i'll
show you the pictures below. Right now, there are no violations associated with this property.
It came to our attention at the RCO meeting and your neighbor doesn't necessarily oppose
the space being used, but asks us obviously to go and legalize it to make sure
we get proper permits. And we are going to do that. We committed to the RCO to do that
into the neighbor. And I don't believe there's a car in that space right now.
And I don't believe there is a car in that space right now.
So that's not, you're not doing that today?
No, that is not part of this refusal, sir.
All right.
All right.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Questions or comments from the board?
No, Mr. Chairman.
No, Chair.
Questions or comments from our attorney, Hillary Emerson?
Not at this time, Mr. Chair.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
I do not see any hands, Mr. Chair.
Planning Commission.
Planning Commission.
is the pun and commissioner still available
we've all had such connectivity issues today yeah a little bit a little bit
yeah uh good afternoon this is keith davis um i'm backing up ron um ron bedner and uh i'm not
sure that he's he did you hear it yes i did okay um well first of all what can can you are you
willing to vote can you vote uh i think after you swear me in i i can i can oh yeah i want to
yeah right so state your name and spell please for the court stenography sure so my name is
keith davis that's k-e-i-t-h-d-a-v-i-s right do you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole
truth and nothing but the truth yes i do please proceed keith this property is currently
uh currently indicated for mixed use on the city plan uh in 2017 the zoning map was amended on this
block from arm one to to rsa five the proposed use is substantially similar um in configuration
to single-family use that is otherwise permitted in this zoning district.
City Planning Commission has no objection to granting this minor variance.
Thank you. MI 2023-002-920-429 South 16th Street, I vote yes.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes.
Thank you, Counsel. You have your votes.
Thank you. Have a great evening, everyone.
We're going to go to number one.
MI 2023-002-923-1537-39 Deal Street.
Stephanie Boggs Magana is the attorney or Brett Feldman.
Letter of opposition from Frankfort NAC, no reason given.
Letter of opposition from Council Member Lozada.
The applicant has given us eight form letters of support, one signed by an individual.
Good afternoon. Thank you.
Hi. Could you say your name, please, and spell for the court stenographer?
Sure. Stephanie Magana, S-P-E-P-H-A-N-I-E, Magana, M-A-G-A-G-N-A, from the law of Claire Harrison.
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 or relationship to the property?
My client is Frankford Creek Studios LLC here represented by Peter Crawford in attendance today.
And our vice chair has just a few questions for you.
Good evening, counsel.
Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal or stipulate to his accuracy?
Yes, I do.
Have you emailed in all the required documents and exhibits that is needed and required to proceed with this case?
five days in advance of this hearing yes i have thank you please proceed and share your screen
thank you
is my screen visible it is okay great thank you um sorry i know there's been connectivity issues
today so i wanted to check um as mentioned the subject property here is 15 37 39 deal street
This property is located about half a block from the L train station at Church and East
Erie Toursdale station. It's also half a block from Kensington Avenue here on Deal Street.
This block is a mixed zoning block. We are within a RSA 5 district ourselves.
Across the street there is an auto sales lot that is zoned CA1.
This property is occupied by an existing two-story building that was built in approximately 1925.
is occupied by an existing two-story building that was built in approximately 1925,
two-story vacant structure that is in significant need of repair. It was purchased by the current
owner in 2022 in its existing condition. It had historically been approved or been used as a
meeting hall, but we believe at some point, informally or unofficially, it was used as a
warehouse by the last owner. And as I mentioned, the property is in significant need of repairs
and is currently vacant. The new owner intends to renovate this building and restore it to an
active use in the neighborhood and to improve its aesthetic condition on the street as well.
This application in particular seeks really to convert the existing building into 16
artist studio units. Here's a copy of the refusal that was issued by L&I. As an RSA 5 zoning
district, artist studios are not permitted in this zoning district, which is the reason for
the refusal. No additions are proposed with this application, although the building will be brought
up to code, modern building and safety codes in connection with the renovations that will be
performed with the change of use. But we are seeking variance relief to convert the building
for Artist Studios. We presented this project to the RCO on November 9th, the Frankfurt CDC,
and there was questions at the meeting about whether this property would end up being used
as a halfway house or a drug rehab center, and ultimately there were three votes at the RCO
meeting in opposition to this project, and that is noted on the letter that was submitted by
Frankfurt CDC. Since that time, the owner's representative, Peter Crawford, has spoken to
many of his neighbors, 12 of whom who have now signed letters of support that are submitted to
the board and included within our packet, noting their support for this project. We have one in
addition to what Peter can explain about this meeting. Andrew Cohen owns a daycare business
adjacent to this. He's also submitted a letter that's noted here and has some comments about
the meeting, and he is here to testify about this matter as well. So with that, to allow some
additional context on the project i'll call peter crawford um you can raise your hand and identify
yourself for the board they've been not to speak yes uh hi could you could you mr core could you
state your name and spell please for the court stenographer yes uh peter crawford c-r-a-w-f-o-r-d
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Please proceed, sir.
Thank you, sir.
Just initially, have you heard the statements I made to the board earlier?
Yes, I have, yes.
Are they true, to your knowledge and belief?
Yes. I would just like to add that I was told by somebody who attended the community meeting that the vote was was three to two.
So I was confused when we got the letter stating a three to zero vote.
And I also wanted to mention that we have the support of the block captain for 1500 block of Deal Street by the name of Kathy Shadle.
She is one of the signatories on our support letters, along with a lot of other residents of Deal Street.
Thank you, Peter. If I could, just before you continue your testimony, I just want to, for the record, have you confirm whether you'd adopt my statements as your own, for the record?
Yes, I would. Thank you.
Okay, thank you. Go ahead, Peter. Proceed.
Yes. As Stephanie was saying, there were rumors flying at the community meeting that this was going to be a halfway house or some form of drug or alcohol rehab facility or even an injection site.
and uh you know this is uh hearsay but i've been told secondhand that that was the reason for some
people opposing it and after uh the meeting uh we sat down with uh people in uh the neighborhood
and a lot of a lot of near neighbors and gave them a tour of the building and and uh clarified
in their minds that there is no way this is going to be any type of rehab facility, and we
intend to make it into artist studios. Thank you, Peter. If we can go back, I just want to
give the board some additional context on your purchase of the property. When did you purchase
the property? We purchased it in the spring of 2022, I believe, yes. What was the existing
20, 22, I believe. Yes.
What was the existing condition of the building when you purchased the property?
condition of the
The existing condition was I think they had done some work with the roof and the roof framing, but it did need some structural work.
And, you know, it looked basically as you see in the photographs.
and maybe somewhat obvious given the pictures of the building um but given that you're you're most
familiar with it is the existing building and its conditions consistent with the zoning here for
single-family use this is a 6 000 square foot building uh that historically has has been used
as a meeting hall it was built for french immigrants uh to the frankfurt neighborhood
and it was the Franco-Belgium Literary Society for many years.
Later, it was a meeting hall for the Frankfurt Optimist Society.
It has never been a single-family house,
and it's 6,000 square feet laid out as a meeting hall.
It doesn't seem appropriate to me for a single-family home.
So that's how you came to,
how did you come to the proposed development for Artist Studios?
Well, we see and, you know, anybody in the Riverard sees that a lot of artists are getting kicked out of their existing studios.
I think this happened in a building on Coral Street, and a lot of these buildings are being changed to residential.
So we felt we're a little bit further up the L and we could provide an outlet for affordable artist studios for the art community.
Great. Now, what I'm showing on the screen here are the plans for the property.
These are rough sketches of the floor plans for the ground floor and the second floor.
Can you briefly explain for the board what the layout is going to be for this building?
I mean, I think the layout is simple and straightforward. We have two levels. We have a basement level that is about half below grade and half above grade, which will have windows. And we have plans for eight studios on each floor. And there's an addition on the side where we plan to have utility sinks and bathrooms for the tenants.
Are there any other additions planned to this existing building?
No further construction or change in the footprint is planned, no.
Sure. As far as operations go when these units are occupied,
can you explain a little bit about the use and the nature of the use?
Yes. Well, we will not be doing anything that requires unusual electrical loads
or unusual exhaust requirements.
There's no glass blowing or metal work.
This will be low impact photography studios,
visual artists, maybe digital artists,
maybe people doing something with paper
or doing something with fabric.
It'll be low impact artist uses.
And will those be inside the building
or will any uses be outside of the building?
just inside the building. Will there be any noise or odors or other vibrations that might
escape the building itself? No, I don't believe so. These are low-impact uses.
Have you made or will you make arrangements for trash pickup?
Yes, we have a side yard on either side of the building, so the larger side yard will contain a
a location for for trash and either cans or a small dumpster you mentioned this and it's obvious
from the map of the property um but the building is located closely to the l um do you anticipate
that most of the users of this space will use the available public transportation
yeah so that's one of the reasons that uh i made the purchase you know i felt that uh
I felt that the users could get to this location by public transportation.
And to confirm, on-street parking is available on Kensington Avenue and Deal Street, is that correct?
Yes, I believe so, yes.
And I just wanted to confirm, the proposed application and the units that are proposed,
given the existing conditions of the building and the cost to maintain this building.
The existing conditions of the building and the cost to maintain this building, is that the least minimum that's necessary in order for you to convert this to an act of viable use?
Yes, it's already going to be a challenge at 16 units, but I can't imagine that we would be able to do less than that and have enough revenue to operate the building, especially considering that we have to purchase flood insurance.
And it's because of its location near Frankfurt Creek?
Yes, we are just far enough in the hazard area that we're required to purchase flood insurance.
Thank you, Peter. I don't know if there's anything else you want to add, but I think at this point we can call Andrew.
Andrew Cohn, again, is in your neighbor who attended the RCO meeting.
He can speak to the letter he submitted to the board about that meeting in particular and neighborhood support generally for the project.
No, I have nothing to add.
Andrew, can you please raise your hand and identify yourself with the board if you're in the audience?
Please raise your virtual hand.
I'm looking for him right now, sir.
Please raise your virtual hand if you're in the audience.
The no-hands. What is the name again?
My name is Andrew Cohen.
C-O-H-E-N.
All right.
They've been about to speak.
Could you state your name, please, and spell for the court stodographer?
My name is Andrew Cohen,
and I'm the owner of the
who connects to...
Mr. Collins, do me a favor, spell your name for the court reporter.
My name or my last name?
Well, your last name is fine.
Right.
C-O-H-E-N.
Right.
Do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, sir.
Only the truth.
Yes, sir.
Please proceed, counsel.
Thanks, Andrew.
Can you explain the property that you own in connection to this project?
what a question where is your property located in connection in relation to this property
yeah i have a couple of them the first one is right away attached to the project is 1549
deal this is the first one the second one is the whole building uh the daycare 1550 adams avenue
and I also own 1548 Adams Avenue,
the Jefferson House, Thomas Jefferson House.
And then I own the two properties in 1537,
and it's two properties, 32 and 34 Adams.
Also, it's fine.
Basically, I have like five, six properties
between Dill and Adams Avenue.
Thanks.
Are you in support of the project as it's proposed?
I want to add, there was misunderstanding on the beginning.
Somebody give wrong information, they're going to be halfway house.
Peter is very honest, and he looked like me, like a businessman and a real estate guy.
And we go with a tour, and me, I'm a licensed contractor.
And that's what I do, real estate.
And I support the project because Peter's goal and my goal is to have this area taken out of the drugs and make it like a fish town, like a good, good area.
And we are on the way.
If you pay attention, my buildings, I spend like millions of dollars in and around.
So I have a huge, amazing daycare and Thomas Jefferson house.
And we've got help.
We have Peter.
Can you concentrate on this property and not other properties he owns?
Yeah, absolutely.
Okay, thank you.
Just to circle back, I think you're on so you can't see it, but I am showing the board a copy of the letter that you submitted regarding the RCO meeting.
You touched on that a little bit about the confusion, but just to circle back, you noted in your letter that there was confusion about the vote specifically.
Again, I couldn't hear you.
Your letter to the board that you submitted, I'm showing on the screen right now, if you can't see it, just to orient you.
Your letter to the board that you submitted, I'm showing on the screen right now.
You mentioned in the letter that you submitted that there was confusion about the vote taken at the meeting.
I just wanted to see if you could speak to that for the board.
Yeah, it was very clear.
The captain block was confused and everybody thought it was going to be a drug area and we don't support that.
and when we figured out with peter they're going to be art studio and no drugs and no violence
and going to be only positive stuff so we a hundred percent support the project because like
i said our goal is to bring this area up to the next level in the next three four five years
We want to take the drive.
Based on those conversations, is it your opinion that the neighbors,
those who attended the meeting and otherwise on this block,
are in support of the project, in your opinion?
A hundred percent.
Yeah, that's why in a call yesterday, I go and we raise all my tenants
and support it.
I get all the signature, of course.
So it's a fact.
Everybody now support it because now everybody knows the truth.
And the truth is they're going to be art studio.
And everybody supports it right now, including me.
Most of the property around the project belongs to me.
And I'm the main one who should be concerned because I own the daycare, the big daycare.
I own the Thomas Jefferson house.
Of course, I'm concerned and I support the project.
Thank you very much, Andrew.
With that, I just want to summarize briefly for the board.
Because of the existing conditions of this building, the denial of the application was
and unnecessary hardship to the owner who purchased the property in its existing condition.
The proposed development represents the lease minimum variance required to convert the existing
building into a viable use and the lease modification of the use regulations for this
based on the the minor addition that's being proposed we also don't anticipate any harm
to the resources or facilities in the neighborhood and certainly to the use of the adjacent properties
and this proposed use will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood but instead will
restore the existing building to an act of viable use.
With that, we're happy to answer any questions.
Questions from the board?
No, Mr. Chairman.
No, Chair.
Questions or comments from our attorney, Hillary Emerson?
Not at this time, Mr. Chair.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
Yes, I have some folks with their hand raised.
I have allowed them to speak at this time.
hi mr folks good afternoon uh chairman bergman zba board my name is my name is sloan folks s-l-o-a-n-e
f-s-n-f-i-r-o-l-k-s office of council member ketsi lazada do you swear or affirm to tell the
truth the whole truth nothing but the truth yes i do please proceed i uh may i just i'm just i'd
like to ask the attorney for the applicant a question regarding the gentleman that just made
the uh that just testified and submitted the letter um and i'm just a bit confused i need
some clarity on what his statement what is the issue mr folks no it's not an issue i have a
question now and my question is this it is it is this letter states that the gentleman um that
submitted this letter uh mr cohen andy cohen uh contention it says that he voted yes on the
project at the community meeting is that what he's saying on the record
that's what his letter says andrew i'll let you speak for yourself if you're still available to
confirm that your vote at the meeting was yes thank you hung up
um if he's not available i'll just point to note four in the letter um that says that if they
didn't record the voters three two um they're not counting my vote um his letter of support
is included within our packet in his supportive project as he testified yeah i'm not i'm not
contesting with the uh the uh the gentleman's letter of support just uh stating for the record
that i was at the meeting that i was at the vote uh mr cohen did not vote at that it did not make
a vote at that meeting he stated that he would talk he wanted to get more information from the
applicant um if his if he stayed if he submitted a letter saying yeah can i vote for myself i don't
need that well i'm not yeah when i finish well let mr folks finish please mr folks if the if
the gentleman is contending now that he supports it we accept we accept that um but for the record
um the gentleman did not make a as my recollection and my notes and the notes of these
the gentleman did not make a as my recollection and my notes and the notes of the rco have
he did not make a vote at that you know at that meeting so i just want to submit that for the
record thank you mr folks are you taking wait a minute mr folks are you going to take a position
on the on the project actually our letter is based on the boot that was taken um at
At this point, we understand that the community has submitted letters to support the project,
but we're going to stand with what we submitted regarding the RCO vote.
We have no contention with what the community has stated in their letters of support for the project.
It would have been nice to receive those letters so that we could have made that argument, made that argument as well, and we could have reached out to the community to discuss it, just to make confirmation of that as a way to counter what the RCO vote was for the record and for our records also.
But in as much as we weren't able to do that, we have to stand on what the vote was at the meeting.
So thank you, sir.
Thank you.
I just want to clarify, I was not aware you were submitting a letter today. I did not receive a copy of it, or certainly we would have been able to provide the letters. The last one was received this morning, so I do apologize for the delay, but I'd be happy to send copies of you to you for your own records.
But I did just want to clarify that we're not proposing any malice at all on behalf of the RCO.
I think our understanding, having not been there from what we've been told, is that there may at best have been some confusion.
But we are certainly happy to have spoken to the neighbors since then and will note their letters of support for the record.
Is there anyone else in the virtual audience?
No, sir. There is no other hand.
Planning Commission.
This is Ron Bednar, City Planning.
These properties are indicated for commercially,
are currently indicated for single-family residential use on the city plan.
Given the physical condition of the site and the proposed use, reuse,
we recommend the request of variance be granted.
Thank you.
MI 2023-002923-1537-39 Deal Street, I vote yes.
Thomas Holliman, I vote yes.
Mr. Shahid?
Maybe having trouble with his audio.
Yeah, Chair, it seems like it's a problem.
Can we just hold the vote on this one?
This is Tanya.
I apologize.
We're going to hold the vote on this.
We'll vote on this next week.
next Wednesday
Mr. Chair just pause for a minute
we currently do not have a forum
we need to just pause while we
figure out what's happening thank you
Thank you.
We won't vote it, come on, come on the phone.
do you hear me we hear you now we hear you now as you heard the last case
my vote is yes thank you thank you very much counsel stay on we're going to go to this next
case right yes all right mi2022-006-365-1535 deal street stephanie boggs is the attorney
um letter of support from frank vernac letter of non-opposition from council member lozada
um you you represent the same client right am i correct that's correct it's frank and
and that age could you go over um follow questions sure thing you agree to weigh the
reading of the refusal or stipulate to his accuracy i do have emailed in all the required
documents that is needed and required to proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing
yes i have thank you please proceed to share your screen
um so for reference this property is located directly next door to 1537 deal street that
we just talked about. This is 1535 Field Street. It's an existing, or it was purchased by our
client in 2022. It's a fully rented two-unit building. As you can see, it's an existing
two-story house, currently fitted out as two units. It was occupied, both units at the time
it was purchased. And then it came to the attention of the owner that there is only valid approval
for one unit here. So this application seeks to legalize the existing use of the property.
The property is currently rented in the same condition as it was purchased.
So we are looking to seek approval to legalize that second unit and to maintain the occupant of the of that unit.
The refusal was issued because two family household living is not permitted in the RSA five district.
We presented this application in conjunction with the other project to the RCO on November 9th.
The neighbors issued a letter of support for this project, which is included in the zoning letter.
Again, to reiterate, there are no additions or changes to the project that are proposed
or simply seeking to legalize the use in the condition in which it was purchased by my client.
With that, I'll ask Peter Crawford to identify himself again and adopt my statements for the record.
Peter, can you raise your hand?
Mr. Crawford, Mr. Crawford, you've already been sworn.
Just state your name, please.
Peter Crawford, C-R-A-W-F-O-R-D.
Please proceed, counsel.
Thank you, Peter. Did you hear my brief statements to the board?
Yes, I did.
Are they correct to your understanding and knowledge?
Yes, they are. Thank you.
Would you adopt them as your own?
Yes, I would.
Thank you. Are there any questions for the board?
Is the house separated with utilities and all?
Yes, the house has separate utilities, yes.
okay um questions from the board no mr chairman no chair questions or comments from hillary
emerson our attorney not at this time mr chair questions or comments from the virtual audience
i do not see any further hands mr chair i play any commission
Ron Bednar city planning properties indicated for use on a city plan given the physical condition
of the site we recommend the request of parents be ready thank you MI 2022 006365 1535 Deal Street
I vote yes.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you, counsel.
Number five, MI 2023, 002-942-1546-48 South 20th Street.
Jennifer Bratzello is the attorney.
We have...
A letter of opposition for the Point Breeze Community Development Coalition.
However, there was no vote taken.
Give me one second.
Give me one second.
I'm just having some technical issues here.
I'm here.
I swore you a little while ago.
Am I correct?
Correct.
Could you identify your client in relationship to the property?
My client's name is Daniel Katz, and he is the property owner and applicant.
Our vice chair has a few questions.
Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal or stipulate to his
accuracy? I do. Have you emailed in all the
required documents and exhibits that is required and needed to proceed with this case
five days in advance of this hearing? Yes, all the required documents
were emailed in five days in advance. I did email a few additional documents
this morning, but they were not part of the required documents.
Understood. Thank you. Please proceed. Share your screen. Great.
We just get to the correct tab. All right. One second. There's sorry, things are appearing in weird order right now.
OK, so I just want to take a moment before we get into the details of my case, since I know there's some controversy about what happened at the RCO.
I'm going to go into more detail later, but I do just want to just address a couple of things with the board so that you have context as I'm presenting.
So we had the meeting. We had a very extensive meeting for several hours with the RCO.
It was not necessarily well attended. There was, I think, nine people total and only one of them was an actual neighbor.
The rest were other members from RCO boards and overlapping RCO boards.
They had suggested some changes to our plans.
I discussed it with the developer.
He didn't want to change anything.
So the following day, I said, hey, you know, we're not changing anything.
Do you think we want to, you want to meet with us again?
Probably not necessary since we had already presented our case.
I followed up again on November 13th, as you can see, saying, hey, do you want to meet
with us again or are you going to issue a letter based on our conversation and um albert little
page who's the head of the rco uh explicitly said that they did not want to meet with us again
so i was honestly quite um taken aback when last week we received a letter from point breeze
saying that we refused to meet with them again because i explicitly asked if they wanted us to
I'm also just going to say this is a pretty straightforward project.
It's subdivision with one new development, one overbuild, four units total.
It's not a super complicated case.
And we'd already had hours of discussion.
So I, at this point, I'm a little bit confused about what happened here because I thought I had worked out with the RCO what was going on.
I will say we would agree to like a brief continuance.
It's just that we have been waiting.
I have been trying to meet with this RCO since May and repeatedly reached out to them.
I have the emails in here since May, kept asking, kept asking.
Finally, at the end of June, they finally got back to me and they scheduled me for October
23rd, which left very little time between then and now to do any more further conversations.
And I just don't think this is on the developer.
to have to wait until May or June of next year for a continuance because the RCO didn't do what
they were supposed to do. So if they're willing, if you guys, if there's any way to like continue
this for 60 days, we would be happy to go back and meet with the RCO. But I just don't think it's
fair to my client to, you know, have to wait basically a whole year for a case because the
rco didn't schedule on time and then also didn't give me correct information about what they wanted
for me so um if you want me to proceed i will but i just wanted to explain well initially you said
you wanted to go on with the case if i remember i do because i don't want hold up one hold up one
minute um tanya how far away will we be if we could bring this back nothing real soon chair
Are we talking about going towards at least the beginning quarter of next year?
Next year.
Chair, if I may.
Can we just hear the case and wait for the vote until we get the letter in?
We could do that.
We could hear the case, and she could arrange to meet with them,
and then we'll close it for anything but a response from the RCO,
A response from the RCO and also let her have a response to that. OK, Hillary.
and also let her have a response too.
That's fine, Mr. Chair, we may. So.
If we we just need to be clear for taking public testimony today or not, and if we're just holding for additional documents or if we're going to accept any additional testimony at a later time, if so, then we would.
I think what we would probably do then, we would take public testimony the next time after the RCO takes a position, because the RCO probably would have some people want to say something.
So I don't see a sense in doing it today.
I think she puts her case on, and we go back, and we won't close it until then.
We'll let, you know, public testimony and also the RCO, she'll have a chance for a response, and I would think that probably planning would want to wait for that too.
Am I correct?
yeah why don't what jennifer why don't we put this on sure i just i just wanted to be able
to be finished within the next couple months not wait until june that's really my own yeah i
understand okay okay cool so i will put on my case here this is tanya if i could make a
recommendation that we give a timeline for the response from the rco as well just so that this
not being kicked along because we're really booked these days yeah yeah yeah well i think
what we do we say you know this has to be done in you know she has to work out what she has to do
in the next month with the rco wonderful cheer thank you kindly all right proceed thank you
all right so i'm going to present my case then um so like i said uh i'm here today representing
Daniel Katz, who's the owner of 1546 to 48 South 20th Street. I'm just going to walk through some
of my exhibits right now, and then we'll come back to the ones that are relevant to my argument.
We have the refusal here. This is the deed showing that Daniel Katz doesn't, in fact,
to own the property um this is uh the tax is paid the balance here is for 2024 which is not yet owed
but you can see the zero balance um for all previous years uh this is the rco letter that
we were discussing um as well as all of my communications with the rco uh including about
you know meeting again and about scheduling the community notification
letters that were sent out sent out to I think like 288 addresses this is a
zoning map of the area this is our property right here this year nearby
uses that are not single-family homes the zoning archives for these
properties showing that previously they had been a four unit dwelling and also then two units
uh with a commercial use on the first floor as the last documented use
um sorry scrolling through here we'll be coming back to some of this and then also i have the
immediately adjacent property at 1544, was approved for two units in 2019.
We're going to come back to that too as well.
This is the aerial views of our property.
And then photographs here, you can see our postings on both sides of the property on Tasker and 20th Street.
Here you can see this brick building right here.
that's the part of the property that's 1548 and then this vacant lot here is 1546
and then this new construction is 1544 just for reference going forward here you can see the side
garages of the property this is the side of 1548 and these are up and down 20th streets and
Tasker streets and again that's 1544 that was approved for two units we also have our plans
which I'm going to come back to later but yeah so I'm just going to come back to those in a
second in more detail. So let me just go here. Okay so 1546-48 is currently one property but
in the past has been two based on the documents that I can find but I can't figure out when they
were actually combined. But right now, it is a double wide lot consisting of 1546 and 1548.
The entire parcel is a little under 2100 square feet. And it's located at the corner of 20th and
And it's located at the corner of 20th and Tasker in the Point Breeze neighborhood.
Tasker in the Point Breeze neighborhood.
There is two different zoning districts.
1546, which is the lot portion right here, is zoned RSA 5.
And 1548 is zoned CMX 1.
As you can see, there is a vacant lot on 1546.
and 1548 has an existing two-story structure that's a little under 1700 square feet it's a
two-story building that already has two units in in it um and it has a two-car garage existing
on the side as you can see in these photos um our proposal uh let me just go to our plans
is we are going to subdivide the parcel back into two parcels.
The size of those lots are conforming
and did not receive a refusal for the size of the lots.
And then on 1546, there's going to be a new construction built
that will have two bi-level units.
Unit one will be two bedrooms and two baths
with access to the rear yard.
and unit two will be three bedrooms with three baths and access to a roof deck.
In 1548, we will be keeping the existing structure and maintaining the cornice line,
but we will be adding a third story overbuilt to, you know, modernize the building, bring it,
and make two larger units than what exists right now. So again, unit one will be two beds,
three baths, and unit three will be three beds, three baths. All of these units are larger family
sized units that range between 1,150 square feet and 1,300 square feet. We're offering to have
these new and fully rehabbed properties that are appropriate for families. They will be market
rate housing, but because of the nature of constructions and having the two units in each
building, we are able to offer that at a significantly lower price than if you were
having just a single family new construction home. I just wanted to note that both buildings
will have ample outdoor lighting and security and that units that don't have access to outdoor
trash storage will have trash closets and trash compactors put in them. So I just want to go over
I'm going to keep going over the variances for each property. So I want to first talk about
because as we mentioned the subdivision is by right. So I just want to go over for 1546
the only refusal is for use of the property as a two family dwelling um and as i said before
um 15 actually let's go to this page first hold on 15 uh 44 which is our immediate neighbor was
approved in 2019 for um exactly what we're proposing at uh 1546 in fact it's designed
by the same architect and it will just be the mirror image of it. So the most impacted neighbor
here is 1544 and they will be living in a building that is exactly the same as the building that's
going up next to them. Here you can see the decision and
oops sorry one second and here you can see the building. So we're just proposing to build this
building on this lot with the same exact use same exact floor plan just mirrored um so also this is
not as you might imagine from it being this other building being approved in 2019 um this is not
something that's out of character for this block or this neighborhood uh there are at least four
other um non-single family homes on this block uh as you can see there's a commercial with two
residential units, and then three other duplexes on the block. And when you go to the next block
adjacent, the 1600 block of South 20th, you can see that we have a range of mixed use,
another new construction, two residential building, and then up to a five unit commercial
and four residential unit building on that block as well, triplexes, duplexes. And then when you
go on the surrounding block with Casker. We have a mix of commercial and multifamily as well. So this
is this is not out of character at all and especially since we for 1546 you are in the
And for 1546, you are in the middle of two properties that are already two units.
middle of two properties that are
So it's exactly in line with what is already there and literally mirroring the building that is next to it.
I also want to just go briefly to the zoning archive for 1546, which is here.
So the last documented, I'm not sure, I couldn't figure out again, when exactly these properties were combined, and when 1546 was demolished, but all of the existing records going back into the 40s for this property show that 1546, when it existed, was a four-unit residential building, and was only two stories.
And so we're actually proposing something less dense than what was there prior prior to it becoming a vacant lot.
And you can see in here that it was approved for four units as its last documented use.
So, you know, we're looking to use the property in a way that is conforming with the surrounding uses and is less intense than what was there prior.
to us prior to the vacant lot being there so you know we're looking for just one more unit which
we think is the minimum necessary here to provide any release from the hardship that like you know
we're in a neighborhood that is not surrounded by non-single-family homes and not trying to
overuse the property in any sort of way so I didn't want to talk at 1548 is a little bit more
complicated we have use and dimensional refusals there so let me just go to give
me one second so here we have the zoning map as you can see this portion of the
property is zoned CMX1 and as we know you're allowed to have the number of
residential units in CMX1 that are allowed in the adjacent residential zoning district plus a
commercial unit. This building, the prior recorded use here was for a commercial unit and two
additional residential units let me just go here you can see here that we have
sorry this is the wrong property that's 1546 let me just scroll down one second 1548 here
we have on the last approved use was a grocery store and two family dwelling back in the late
80s um right now the building is only two units and we're proposing to continue to use that but
again to having two residential dwelling units is is really um what this building is less intense
use than the building had been used before um and is not an overuse of a cmx2 property that would
be by right a commercial unit and a single-family home. I'd also add that while the adjacent zoning
district is RSA 5, the adjacent residential use is a two-family home. And so while it might not
comply strictly with the zoning code, it is within the spirit of the zoning code of using the property
as the adjacent properties are being used um so hold on one second i also add that the first
floor right now as it is is about 700 square feet which is not super useful for um hold on
one second which is not super useful for a modern commercial space we're also about two blocks off
of Point Breeze Ave, which, as we all know, has a lot of commercial properties and a lot of vacant
commercial properties. So when you're talking about a small space, it's not super appealing,
competing with spaces that may be on a bigger commercial corridor and have more appealing
commercial space. It's not really practical for this to be a commercial use. And it hasn't been
commercial use since my client owned it since um 2011. so um we're looking for a lower intensity
than what would be allowed by right no commercial space just two residential units um in an area
again that has many multi-family housing and will be adjacent to multi-family housing as well
um the remaining variances that are proposed um or the remaining variances that we received
are basically due to existing conditions on the property.
are basically due to existing conditions on the property.
So what we're talking about is the location and dimension of the existing parking spaces,
as well as the size of the rear yard and open area.
So let me go to the parking photo.
We're going to address the parking first.
So this is the existing parking garages, and there are no proposed changes to these garages.
They were grandfathered in.
They've been there for a very long time.
But when we go to subdivide the parcel, you lose the grandfather of the parking spaces.
So nothing's changing.
They're going to stay the same.
um obviously we'll probably do some aesthetic improvements to the facade and the gates and
things like that as the renovation continues um but nothing's changing um i know there was
concerns about the size because one of the variances is for the size of the off-street
parking spaces um and while they are smaller uh after doing some research there are many
city-sized cars, as I would like to say,
that are great to park in here
and completely would fit,
like a Jeep Renegade, a Kia Soul,
a Hyundai Kona, a Buick Encore,
a Land Rover Defender 90,
Volkswagen Golf, Prius C,
Honda Fit, Chevy Bolt,
Mitsubishi Mirage, Audi TSS.
Jennifer, what are you saying?
All the cars that could park there?
or yes because this was one of the main objections from the um community association was they wanted
the parking eliminated because they said that cars couldn't fit okay so i'm just i'm listing
cars that like people have that fit in these parking spaces and i know that's a little
ridiculous but i need to get that record that there are plenty of cars that fit in these parking
spaces um so that that's an existing condition and we're just looking to keep the existing
condition but that generated two refusals for the size of the garages and the location of the
garages um but they are existing and nothing's changing other than the aesthetics um and then
so i also if you look too we also have a parking garage in the adjacent building right here uh
that's similarly small um but in use with the property so it's again not out of character
either with the block. The other refusals are for occupied area and rear yard, and this is
definitely a result of the existing conditions. So if we look at the top of the property,
you can see that we have a property that's pretty much already fully occupied. That's
an existing condition. This building has been here. I found documentation back to the 60s,
but it clearly already existed in the 60s.
So we're probably talking about at least a 60-year-old property,
probably more like 80, 90-year-old plus property.
And so, but again, when we subdivide these parcels back into two,
that existing condition loses its grandfathering.
So that's where we get the occupied area reverts back to,
it's as if we were building a new house.
and obviously we could not meet the occupied area requirements unless this building was demolished
and we are trying to maintain the existing building and just do an overbuild which leads to
the other um the other refusal which is for the rear yard um so let me go here one second
the existing structure at the second floor here is has a seven foot one inch setback
we are looking to just add the third floor in the same dimensions but there's a nine foot
rear yard requirement for when you do the additional third floor um so you know if we
did another additional two feet you would have some sort of weird step kind of it wouldn't look
aesthetically pleasing, and would also result in one of the bedrooms being really kind of small
and awkward, given the dimensions of the existing building. I would also add that there is a four-foot
alley that separates our property from the property to the rear. So when you add half of
that alleyway to our seven feet, you're at the minimum rear yard requirement. So you're still
having that nine foot of separation. And as you can see in here, the building to the rear is
actually built all the way to the property line as well. So it's again in existing condition and it
It's, again, an existing condition and it is, you know, typical for this particular block here.
I would also add that the most affected property is once again going to be the adjacent property that my client owns.
And so any potential new owner would be aware of what was being there.
So it's not imposing itself onto or in any way affecting a neighboring property for this additional two feet.
And like I said, because we actually do have nine feet of separation between where the property line ends and this third story, it will have very minimum, if at all, impact on light and air access.
And again, it would really only impact the adjacent property that my client also owns.
So, what it comes down to here, so, is that, you know, it's really not going to, that setback isn't going to have a significant impact, but it would because of these dimensions of this bedroom, awkward small bedroom, that wouldn't be, we're looking to have units that are functional for families, and if you make a tiny third bedroom, it's less functional for families.
Give you one second, sorry.
And if we were trying to, like I said, the dimensional requests here are all a result of the existing conditions of the property.
We're not trying and we're trying to preserve the existing structure here and just modernize it and provide a little bit more space, bring it up to a full three stories, which is, again, by right to have the full third story.
It's just the rear yard setback, but we're maintaining the back line of the property from what it is.
And bringing it fully into dimensional compliance would require building a completely new structure on the property.
So let's go back and talk a little bit more about what I heard from neighbors.
Or do you want me to?
I mean, I thought we said we're going to bring the neighbors back.
we're going to let the neighbors come in and testify at the next hearing okay if that's if
that's what you want to do um i will just note that there was one affected neighbor who was
there who was in support um but i i am going to address a couple of of um objections i heard
because i think it's relevant to my presentation my my my chief case okay um so like i said that
Wait, wait, wait. Objections that night at the hearing?
At the meeting?
Yeah, okay. I mean, but you're going to have a chance to object again then, right?
In other words, if they take, we're going to have public testimony, and we're also going to see if the Point Breeze wants to send a different letter in.
So, we're real clear, you're going to have an opportunity to talk to them now, but you want to go back and talk now about what happened?
i i would like to just address a couple of issues i'm not gonna i won't go ahead go ahead but so
i guess one of the concerns was the parking space and we talked about the size of the parking space
so i'm just going to reiterate that these are in fact large enough for small cars admittedly not
you know um gigantic suvs but small cars that are appropriate for city use um uh and that um you
You know, there hasn't been a commercial use in the CMX-1 portion in 1548 for a very long time, nor is a commercial use required in CMX-1.
So it's not an appropriate space because it's way too small.
And it's also adjacent to a lot of vacant commercial spaces on a commercial corridor.
And a commercial space is not required.
But we do have a property that's already divided into two units neighboring other two-unit buildings.
in that cmx1 um and then you know like i said this is market rate housing uh there was a lot
of concerns about the market rate housing portion of this um there's nothing this is not a large
project it's not a subsidized project it is a individual developer um looking to improve his
properties. The objection to market rate housing, I would just say that we are trying to give these
family-sized units that are going to be offered at a lower price point than if we had a single
family home on this property. So it is more accessible to a lot more people with the price
point of a duplex than a price point of a single family home while providing two and three bedroom
units that are suitable for family living. They aren't tiny units. They're the same size.
that are suitable for family living um they aren't tiny units they're they're the same size as a lot
of the row houses that are surrounding it um so i mean that was that was some of the things i just
wanted to get on the record to talk about here um but the reality is that we have um you know
a double wide property that can be subdivided by rights uh we have uh a lot of the refusals
are due to existing conditions on the property
that are losing their grandfather
because it's returning to two separate properties
instead of one.
And that the use of each of these units,
properties as two units is in conformance
with the surrounding area.
The CMX2 property, or CMX1 property, excuse me,
already has two units and 1544,
that's immediately adjacent to 1546.
we're building the same property with the same use um so it's it's really in line with the
surrounding areas um this this this use would allow us to uh maintain that existing property
and the existing cornice uh and preserve that building without having to tear it down
and um put up a whole new construction house uh which i think is is advantageous for many people
including my my client but also the neighborhood to preserve the existing structures um
I do want to add now that if for some reason the board isn't inclined to grant the use variances for the two units in each property,
we would ask that you grant the variances for the dimensional variances, for the rear yard, for the parking, the parking location, and the occupied area,
so that we could still proceed with subdividing the parcel
because without those variances, we cannot subdivide.
Do you want your client to adopt your testimony?
Yes. His name is Daniel Katz.
I'm not sure if he's here.
He was called out of the country to deal with a family matter.
So he said he was going to try to attend,
but I don't know if he was able to.
See if Mr. Daniel Katz is here.
Okay, I have a call-in user with their hand raised. I can let them speak if you wish, Mr. Chair.
Call-in user 2, please unmute.
Hi, Tiffany Green.
So Tiffany, she presented her case.
We're going to go give the Point Breeze Development Corporation a chance to meet with her again.
We do know that we have a letter from them in opposition, and you will have a chance at that next hearing to testify.
Can I just say for the record that I don't think that she should have been allowed to give this type of testimony.
I think that the community should be deserved to be at the public meeting to hear what she has to say.
And that's not right. And I want to say also for the record, for the record, I would appreciate the ZBA, a deal with the law of coordinating of RCOs. All RCOs are equal. Coordinating RCO only does the coordinating of the meeting. Nobody, nobody's opinion over.
Tiffany, Tiffany, Tiffany, you're going to have your opportunity when we have the continuation of this case. Okay. I promise you. Thank you.
um do we see mr mr uh katz
all right anyone from the board okay thank you does anyone from the on the board have questions
for the council no mr chairman no chair hillary do you have any questions for council
Just two quick comments, Mr. Chair. One regarding Ms. Green's point that it is up to the board to decide whether or not to proceed, assuming that all requirements have been met, which is that a meeting has occurred, the posting has occurred, and those were met in this case.
So it is to the board's discretion to decide whether to proceed.
Secondly, I just wanted to note to clarify that we do have a resumption date for this matter.
It will be January 24th, 2024 at 3.30 p.m.
The case will be resumed for testimony and or letters from the RCOs.
We will take public testimony as well as the recommendation of the Planning Commission.
and we will give counsel for the applicant a chance to respond wonderful thank you
a chance to respond. Wonderful. Thank you. I'm sorry. This is Tanya and Hillary. I just wanted
to make sure that everyone knows that it doesn't have to be a reposting. That's the date that we
will go forward. Thank you ever so kindly. Thank you. Thank you, Tanya. Thank you.
Okay, let's move on here.
Number eight, MI 2023-005-105-625-27 West Gerard Avenue.
Brandon Saverin is the attorney.
A letter of support from the 14th Community Organization RCO.
Mr. Saverin is coming back in as a panelist, sir.
Mr. Chair, this is Hillary. Can I just confirm that
Board Member Snell has rejoined us? I thought I heard his voice
Jim? Mr. Snell, are you there?
Mr. Snell, are you
present?
Well, we're fine for this case.
It's okay.
No, we will just need him for another case.
That's why I was checking.
I thank you, Mr. Chair.
So, Brandon, you've already been sworn.
Just state your name for the record, please.
Yes, my name is Brandon Saverin.
Hi, Jim.
We hear you, Jim.
and brandon could you identify your client the relationship to this property yes my client is
625 w gerard jv llc the owner of the property and our vice chair has just a few questions for you
good afternoon counsel do you agree with the reading of the refusal
Yes, I do.
Have you emailed in all the required documents and exhibits that is needed and required to proceed with this case?
Thank you.
Please proceed to change.
Thank you, Mr. Vice Chair.
Good evening, members of the board.
So I have submitted 10 exhibits to the board.
I want to highlight, because it will help me keep my presentation very brief, that my arguments for why I think our situation deserves a variance are in Exhibit 1, which is my memo of law.
So I'm not going to rehash those arguments in my testimony.
I would just ask that you move those exhibits, including that memo, into the record following the hearing.
Um, and with that, um, what you're looking at right now is, um, a portion of exhibit 10. So
this is a, um, aerial, uh, photo of the property. The property is, um, look, look, let me start with
this. The property has a building that's relatively new, but has already constructed. So this
application is about a change of use within the parcel. It's not about further construction. So
no addition or anything like that. So here's the outline of the building. It's a strange
shape, but it's one property. So this is what it looks like. This is a photo the architecture
firm took. This is what the Girard Avenue facade of the building looks like. It's between Marshall
Street and 7th on the north side of Girard with the frontage you just saw on Girard, which has a
commercial space and frontage on Marshall. And originally the frontage on Marshall was also
going to have a second commercial space. But essentially what we're here to ask you to do
is to allow us to change the space along Marshall, sort of where my cursor is, which included what
was going to be the second commercial space into parking, into ground level parking.
um so um real quickly um at exhibit 2b this is our notice of refusal um we have uh just one refusal
which is due to the fact that um although in theory parking is allowed it's not allowed on
our property because our property is not served by a rear street or alley we're served by a side
street. And that's how you're going to access the parking, which our architect is going to show you
in a second. But just because of the sort of technical content of the code, side street is
not an allowed manner of access. So that's our only refusal. And the red text here talks about
so that's our only refusal and and the red text here talks about basically what i just said that
basically what I just said.
we're reducing the commercial space we're going to have a total of 14 parking spaces whereas we
currently have none we'll have some bike parking spaces and no changes to um the building height
volume or gross floor area um so i'll just uh only have a couple more things to show you and
then I'm going to pass it to the architect who's going to make an equally short presentation.
This is one of the pages of our zoning plan because I don't have, I didn't show you a photo
of the Marshall Street side. Here's an elevation of the Marshall Street side. And again, this,
this building has been built. What I like about this elevation is it shows you very clearly that
in the back of the property, there is already what I'm going to call a service alley. It's sort
of an area where a truck would pull in behind the building to unload for for the commercial spaces
and we'll still have one commercial space just not two and we're going to use that same curb cut area
as sort of the the driveway into uh the parking is as you're going to see um and um this is the
other page of the zoning plan the site plan and basically that right there is what you saw in the
elevation. So that's where the cars will come in off of Marshall and they'll turn and this parking
is going to be on the ground floor under the building. I think that the last thing I'm going
to show you is our RCO letter, which you mentioned, Mr. Chairman. It's a letter of support. There were
seven people at the meeting in total. They all voted in favor of the proposal.
I think the board in your sort of experience with RCOs would not be surprised to hear that
you know reducing sort of the the indoor space in favor of parking is um uh typically um something
that um an rco would would support and they did here um so with that um i guess i in in your in
your choice mr chairman of order i have the architect and the client to adopt my testimony
um well what's the architects going to just explain a little yeah basically yeah bring
the architect bring the architect on first okay his name is eric quick okay what's his last name
quick uh okay all right uh good afternoon everyone can you hear me i yes could you state your name
please and spell for the courts yes my name is eric quick e-r-i-c-q-u-i-c-k and i'm representing
Harman Deutsch-Oller Architecture. All right. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth,
the whole truth and nothing but the truth? I do. Please proceed, counsel. Thank you. Eric,
I'm going to share my screen again, just sort of for speed here. So you tell me between sort of
the RCO presentation or the zoning site plan. What would you like me to show while you're speaking?
Let's just start on the RCO presentation. Okay. You got it. Go to the first page.
this one or the cover the cover page just so we can see some um the existing pictures so um as
brandon stated this is a uh a building that's already constructed we have two frontages one
on gerard one on marshall um image number one shows our gerard street facade and image number
five i think is best representing the project that shows marshall that is the existing curb cut the
there's already an existing drive aisle and you can see there's an overhead door that accesses
the rear portion of the building which is already currently set up to be a garage
if you want to skip down two more pages we can skip that one so on the left hand side would be
our basement floor plan I don't think we really need to talk about it but we're adding an amenity
space to the basement and then this is our first floor plan where you can see we're adding
um 11 parking stalls into the portion he's mousing over right now and there are three
more parking stalls in the rear portion over there and then the pink area represents our
commercial space thanks eric and and mr chairman and i'll have my client adopt this in a moment
it's important for the board to know that um when you look at that photo and thanks for pointing us
to that, Eric. You know, it seems like the developer may have sort of primed this for
parking in sort of an unethical or illegal manner. But my client was not the developer,
right? So whether you want to view this as a legalization or a new, you know, the bottom
line is we're trying to clean it up. Okay, thank you. Yep, you're welcome. And his name is Mike
Garagulio if we could
bring him on.
Garagulio?
They better not to speak.
they've been enough to speak hi sir could you state your name and spell please for the course
stenographer mike gargiulo g-a-r-g-i-u-l-o right do you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole
truth nothing but the truth yes proceed counsel thank you thank you mr chairman um uh mike firstly
sorry for butchering your last name. Secondly, are you authorized to speak on behalf of 625
West Girard JV LLC? Yes, I am. Okay. Did you hear my testimony
in your zoning case this evening? Yes, I did. Okay. Was it true and accurate to the best of
your knowledge, information, and belief? Yes, it was. Okay. And would you therefore adopt it
on behalf of the llc as if it were your own testimony yes i would okay thank you questions
from the board no mr chairman no chair questions or comments from our attorney hillary emerson
not at this time mr chair questions or comments from the virtual audience
i do not see any further hands mr chair planning commission
ron bednar city planning the property is indicated for commercial mixed use and on city plant in
2021 a zoning amendment bill was approved to change the zoning to cmx 2.5 as per district
Council recommendation 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 in conformity with the requirements of the code. Therefore, we recommend the request
of various documents. Mr. Chairman, if I may, you know, the only thing I'll say to that,
and thank you, Mr. Bednar, is that, again, parking isn't allowed use, but given the code,
we can't have parking without a variance the rco wanted parking if you deny the variance tonight
we're going to have to stick with the current approvals which tell us to build out a second
commercial space in that unit so this i think really comes down to do we honor the rco's wish
for parking or do we kind of throw in another another commercial space and there already is
one. It would be a second commercial space. That's it. Thanks. MI 2023-005-105-625-27
Westerod Avenue. I vote yes. Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes. James Snell, my vote is yes.
Ishmael Shahid, my vote is yes. Thank you, counsel. Thank you.
Hillary, we want to go back to number six
Okay, yeah, well actually there's two
So, yeah, so two things
And actually we'll do number six in a minute
Just a couple housekeeping
Number nine, 2018 East Ontario Street
We were unable to secure an interpreter
So we are continuing this case till next Wednesday
December 20th at 2pm
So if you could just read that into the record
okay why don't i do that thank you let me do that now yeah am i 2023 002 921 2018 east ontario
street this case is continued to december 20th did you say yes at 2 p.m at 2 p.m all right thank you
and um number 10 on the list mr chair um i forgot about this one in continuances earlier um this
case uh is being continued um that we did not receive proof of posting so it's being continued
i'll get to that in a minute let me let me let me um let me get zen's case done here um
and so mi 2021 004 545 636 north 11th street uh ishmael will recuse himself from this
Zen Jin is the attorney.
Letter of support from the 14th Community RCO with a proviso.
Good evening.
Good morning, counsel.
You've already been sworn.
Could you just state your name for the record?
My name is Zen Jin, Z-H-E-N-J-I-N, here on behalf of the applicant, Philadelphia Chinatown Development Corporation.
Thank you.
Mr. Hallman has just a few questions for you.
Good evening, counsel.
Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to his accuracy?
Did you email all of the exhibits and documents as required five days in advance to this hearing?
Did you email all of the exhibits and documents as required?
Five days.
Yes, I have.
Thank you.
Please proceed and share your screen.
Thank you.
I'm going to share with the board the previously submitted exhibits.
Can the board see my exhibit on the screen?
Great.
Thank you.
So this is an application that's actually part of a larger overall project by Philadelphia Chinatown Development Corporation, a nonprofit entity.
This is a series of housing development that actually is packaged together from the financing side by the state and local banks that are supporting this particular project.
We are actually on the final piece of the project.
If the board may recall, we actually came before the board for the other properties that are also part of the package. There are eight properties total. This is the last which we are trying to obtain a duplex used on the lot in order to meet the eight units that the project calls for.
What this project is, is a housing project that would provide affordable housing to individuals who qualify under the requirements.
We actually had met and worked along with the 14th Ward RCO. I believe their name has changed. My apologies. It's just escaping me at the moment.
But the community organization worked closely with Philadelphia Chinatown Development Corporation on a community benefits agreement, an agreement as to how to market and bring these to the attention of people in West Poplar area.
The refusal is because the property is actually located on RSA 5 lot.
However, in order to make the project work, the proposal from Philadelphia Chinatown Development Corporation was to use it as a two-family structure.
Our original design was actually to have two separate single-family style properties or houses, and the original refusal actually reads slightly different because of that, because we have two principal buildings on the same lot.
The RCO and the neighbors would have indicated they prefer to have a duplex, normal duplex, bi-level design, and that is why we went back, redesigned, obtained an amended refusal, and also went back to the community again to meet with them on this particular project.
So the primary issue with the project is, of course, that in order to meet the community's desires to ensure a fair and equal opportunity to everyone who might be interested in these properties,
They wanted us into a community benefits agreement, which we did, and they also negotiated with us on a detailed affordable housing marketing plan to ensure no one is left out in the community that may be interested in pursuing these properties.
The property is located off of North 11th Street.
While it is in the RSA 5 district, I do want to point out that North 11th Street does have other multifamily developments as well.
Although they're spread out sporadically, they're not consistently on the same block.
the plans have been revised from our original plan but essentially the current plan is to have
a bi-level style house to provide a single unit on each floor so as you can see the first floor
would be one unit unit a second floor would be the second unit unit b and partially of unit a
so that it provides enough space for the individuals who will be interested in these units.
We also agreed to make sure that these will be condorized because the ultimate goal is to have these be bought by owners and not just for rental purposes.
And that also is part of the project requirements from the funding side.
So in order to kind of save time, I'm not going to go through the CBA or the affordable housing marketing plan in detail with the board.
But my understanding is that with these changes and with extensive negotiations between the parties, the community is not in opposition of our request to have this property used as a duplex and added to the overall project.
In order for the funding to happen, we need the total number of units.
The board had previously approved the other units, which are all single-family design structures.
This is the only duplex that PCDC has requested before the board.
And then again, we feel that because of other uses similar to this already in the area, this particular example will not cause a negative impact to the community.
And then again, we feel that because of other uses similar to this,
I'm advised that PCDC should have a representative here to answer, to verify my testimony and answer any additional questions.
Thank you.
Zen, do you know who it is?
I don't know if Mr. John Chin is present
or someone from their office
I believe I had a Miss Sutherland
as a possible representative as well
Hi Mr. Chin
could you state your name please
and spell for the court stenographer
John Chin
J-O-H-N-C-H-I-N
Do you swear or affirm
to tell the truth, the whole truth
and nothing but the truth
Please proceed counsel
thank you uh mr chen can you uh did you see my presentation and hear my testimony before the
zoning board yes i did um can you verify what i have represented is true and correct and
adopt my testimony as zero uh yes that is true and correct thank you questions from the board
no mr chairman questions or comments from our attorney hillary emerson
not at this time mr chair questions or comments from the virtual audience
i do not say any further answer mr chair um planning commission uh ron bednor city planning
in 2017 the zoning maps was amended on the uh block from rm1 to rsa5 the proposed use is
substantially similar to in configuration to single family uses that is otherwise permitted
in this zoning district. The SOTY Planning Commission therefore recommends that we have
no objection to the granting of the variance. Thank you. Counsel, did you see the communities
that provide interior trash storage for unit without access to rear yard? Yes, we're fine with
004-545-636
North 11th Street.
I vote yes with proviso.
Interior trash storage for unit
without access to rear yard
and per amended refusal
dated 8-2-23.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes
with provisos.
James Snell, my vote is yes
with provisos.
Ishmael Shahid, my vote is yes with provisos.
No, you're not voting on that issue.
Oh, that's okay. That's okay. Thank you. You have your vote, sir.
Thank you. Have a good evening.
Okay. Number 10, MI 2023, 002-910-5418 Media Street. That case has been continued.
Is there anyone in the virtual audience who had a 330 case that has not been called?
i do not see any further hands mr chair uh thanks everyone uh went a little later tonight
but we appreciate everything you did and i think we we really got a lot of nice cases handled thank
you thank you mr chairman great job