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