All right.
here we have 23 attendees and we can start as you wish
thank you good morning everyone my name is bill bergman and i will be chairing this morning's
meetings with me is our is our board member cheryl l gaston present mr chairman our board
member Tanetta Graham. Present, Mr. Chairman. Our board member Michael Johns. Present, Mr. Chairman.
And our board member Taya Nguyen. I know she's here. Also present is our attorney, Hillary Emerson,
and our deputy director for planning and zoning, Kathleen Grady. Here's our virtual format.
The proceedings are being recorded. With your participation, you agree to be recorded.
The video will be available by contacting ZBAexecutivedirector at phila .gov.
For a court stenographer, we ask attorneys and witnesses to identify themselves before testifying.
If you're participating by phone, press star nine to raise your hand and star six to unmute.
To an appearance statement, call 267 -270 -5548.
Leave your email address and the address of the property in question.
And finally, the question answer box on the screen is not for testimony.
All comments should be directed to our executive director, Kathleen Grady at this point.
All right, let's look at our schedule for today. Number six.
MI 2024 -005 -928 -2353 -59 East Haggard Street. That case has been continued. Are there any other requests for continuances?
Good morning, Chair. This is Jasmine, and I will be your co -host for today. I see no need at this time.
Thank you. And number three, MI 2024, 003 -145 -1732 North Howard Street. That case has been withdrawn.
We're going to start with number five, MI 2024, 005 -394 -1300 Marlboro Street.
Mark Eckert is the owner.
This is a pro se.
We do not have an RCO letter at this point.
There was a meeting held October 8th.
Mark Eckert, if you're in a virtual audience,
please raise your hand.
Do we see him?
Hello.
Hi, Mr. Eckert.
Hey, how are you?
Good, good.
Could you please turn on your video?
yes join as stay as attendee
how do i sorry mark you have to accept the panelists
you declined it so once you accept it okay join us
Okay, I'm starting the video.
Could you state your name and spell, please, for the court stenography?
Yep, you got it. My name is Mark Eckert. It's M -A -R -K -E -C -K -E -R -T.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
This application is for use as a two -family household living in an existing structure.
The proposed use two -family household living is prohibited in the RSA 5 zoning district.
I understand you have sent all your documents in five days prior.
Is that correct?
Please start with your presentation and share your screen.
Share screen.
share screen maybe a little green button on the bottom that start broadcast
it'll be a little green
how's that can you see me um
um i don't see we need to see your document yeah it's up we're up okay it's up all right
did you swear in mr eckert yes yes okay thank you
okay am i good to go and yes you are so this is a proposal for the change of use for uh my house
which is 1300 marborough street i'm representing myself uh this is just a picture of what it
looked like when i got the place versus what it looks like now it was kind of like a stain in the
neighborhood from where i live i live in fish town and uh it was kind of like a an eyesore for the
community but it just shows you what it looked like what it looks like now uh it's a two -story
brick house with the brick back kitchen corner property it's a corner property on the northwest
corner of thompson marlborough street 14 foot 2 by 40 feet it's comprised of two separate apartments
with separate entrances, one on Marlborough Street and one on Thompson Street.
The first floor apartment is one bedroom, one bath, and one kitchen and finished basement.
And the second and third floor apartment is two bedroom, one bath, and one kitchen.
And all the mechanicals are separate.
This is the history of my place.
It's built in 1909.
It was converted into a doctor's office and a single family residence in 1953,
which I have the zoning documents for.
for that but more recently was renovated in 2009 and was granted uh variance for the change of use
as a two -family dwelling on uh april 27th of 2010 um reasons i'm seeking for the variances so i can
legally rent the upper unit of my house while i'm living in the bottom uh like homeowner occupied
purchased uh purchased property in 2020 all this and it was advertised as a two -family dwelling but
But due to my lack of knowledge and expertise, I didn't know that it had actually lost its variance or lost its status as a duplex and was downgraded back into a single family just before I bought the place.
um uh so the variance that i'm seeking will obviate the existing unnecessary hardship due
to the layout of my house which was not caused by myself and uh represents the least modification
of the zoning code to provide me the relief um the property of two apartments they said
separate entry doors no common living spaces and utilities and mechanicals are all uh separate as
a result of that the previous owner and uh i want to establish the use that's consistent
with the previous owner's renovations and like i said the physical layout satisfies
sufficient proof of unnecessary hardship as described in the zoning code 14303 yada yada
record could you tell us what happened when you went to the rco uh i was received very well i
It was basically unanimous.
I had a bunch of neighbors out there in support.
I've been living here for four years, so I know most of the community now.
That's why when they asked me for the receipt of my postal delivery for the notices, I actually went around and handed them out to everyone and knocked up on every door.
So I didn't know exactly how you're supposed to do that.
But some of the documents, it's just that notice that I sent out, yes, for a zoning permit application, but I wasn't able to find it.
But this is the best I could for the current zoning permit.
This is the notice of my refusal.
and this is my application for the appeal
this is the project information form and here it is in another format just in case
this is my deed
tax clearances
it's the layout of the uh the first floor unit
this is the first floor apartment that i reside in
basement the finished basement and then the second and third
Basement, the finished basement.
And then the second and third floor apartment.
These are pictures of that zoning notice in my window.
When I originally got it, I was having difficulty finding an 11 by 17 piece of orange paper.
So initially I had to put it on a regular piece of paper, but then
And then I got it.
Mr. Ecker, did you ever receive a letter from the RCO?
I received an email.
So I actually reached out to him because I did an accelerated review.
So I guess they didn't have enough time to get to me.
So I actually messaged.
I emailed my RCO.
And he snuck me in for, I think it was two weeks ago.
I have, I have corresponding, I have email correspondence to show that too. And I did attend, and I got pretty much unanimous support.
Mr. Chair, just to update, Mr. Everett from Fishtown Neighbors did send a draft copy of a letter of support from the RCO. It indicated there were about 35 attendees, including about nine near neighbors, and the vote was strongly in support, 29 to 6.
okay all right so there's just a just a couple additional documents before i'm done it's a zoning
use permit from the 1953 and 1960 um but this one's probably more important for you guys this
is the use permit for um to legalize existing two -family dwelling uh back in 2010 which was
granted the variance on the right side you see it was granted a variance uh on the i think it was
the 10th of april 2010 okay there's another certificate statement there's the email
correspondence for me to the uh and then that was a flyer that they sent out to all my neighborhood
um i did this just in case because people at l and i were telling me i could do this but i didn't
submit this yet because they were saying i got i either do this or this affidavit of continuous
use but i got a notarized i never sent it in because this was already this was already going
down so i figured i'd just go through this um activity license i don't think you even asked for
that and then this is just a checklist to show i walked around the all the uh properties in my
neighborhood uh and then this is just more additional uh this is a petition i just drafted
this up really quick before my uh my rco meeting and walked around i got a bunch of signatures but
i didn't have enough time so i didn't get it all questions from the board
questions or comments from our attorney hillary emerson
um just um briefly mr mr eckert the the powerpoint that you showed had some information
in it that um wasn't previously submitted to the board um i so i know that i know there was an
issue with size are you able to break that powerpoint up and email that to us sure so
so that we have all of that information in our file you could do that by is there anything
you specifically that you're missing because i thought i i hit everything that was required in
the uh preparing your for your meeting it was like 10 different we did not see a copy of the petition
um the list of addresses with your notations okay um we didn't we didn't have that um i think you
had some slides about the the size of this the space sure um and the different apartments so we
had all the basic documents that were required
but those that were the additional
supplemental documents that I mentioned
that you showed to the board we did not receive
okay you want the list of addresses
the petition
and the slides on the space and what not
yep no problem
all right thank you so much
the affidavit would be helpful too
you want the affidavit I'd send that in
yeah I would think so
yes that'd be great
thank you
And who do I send that to?
You send it to the same emails that you sent your exhibits to.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
Yes, Chair.
I have a hand up by the name of Robert Everett.
They have been allowed to speak.
Morning, Mr. Everett.
Good morning.
Good morning.
Can you please state your name and spell for the court stenographer?
Can you please state your name and spell for the court stenographer?
Robert, last name Everett, E -V -E -R -E -T -T.
Where or from the told truth, nothing but the truth?
Please proceed.
As Ms. Emerson said, I just sent the draft copy that I had prepared for our chair to send in.
Not sure why.
but yes we had an in -person meeting on october the 8th we snuck him in at the last minute because
there had been some issues with notifications from downtown and it was a 29 to 6 overall
community boat seven to two nearby they were all very happy to see him finally getting that
house back up to what it hadn't been used for years ago mr ever thank you very much we appreciate
anyone else in the virtual audience
yes chair
I have a hand up by the name
of Jamie McDonnell
they have been allowed to speak
could you please state your name
and spell for the court stenographer
good morning
it's Jamie McDonnell
J -A -M -I -E
last name M -C -D -O -N -A -L -D
you swear or affirm
to tell the truth
the whole truth
nothing but the truth
are you a neighbor yes please proceed um i'm a neighbor and own 1310 marlboro and i just wanted
to also voice my support of the um zoning change and request by mark thank you for taking the time
to calls we appreciate it anyone else in the audience yes chair i have a hand up by the name
of maggie h they have been allowed to speak why could you please state your name and spell for
the stenographer sure uh maggie m -a -g -g -i -e hayes h -a -y -e -s where a firm to tell the truth
told you is nothing but the truth yes are you a neighbor yes uh please uh start your testimony
um i just also want to voice my support mark is awesome he cleaned up that whole house
he paid a lot of attention to the architectural features on the house
he takes care of the street he's it the house is beautiful and i just want to support
his work and this whatever should be granted thank you maggie is there anyone else in the
virtual audience i see no more hands at this time too any commission
please take down this green chair please okay uh stop share yes thank you
Planning Commission. Good morning, Amy Boyd with the Planning Commission, A -M -Y -P -O -Y -D.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
I do. Please proceed.
The comprehensive plan recommends no change in zoning at this location from the existing single -family residential RSA 5.
The proposed use is consistent with documented fire use and that there are unique physical circumstances and conditions that would prevent this property from being used in conformance of the zoning code.
The City Planning Commission recommends that the board grant the request of variance for two family household livings.
Thank you. MI 2024 -005 -394 -1300 Mall, Borough Street, I vote yes.
Michael Johns, my vote is yes.
Carol Gaston, my vote is yes.
Sonetta Graham, my vote is yes.
I would, my vote is yes.
Thank you, sir. You have your votes.
Thank you.
Thank you, everybody.
Oh, sure. Thank you, Mr. Ocker.
Number two, MI 2024 -002 -348 -2049 North Randolph Street.
This is a resumptive hearing.
Mr. Vern Anastasio is the attorney.
Vern Anastasio will be joining us as a panelist.
Thank you.
Good morning, Mr. Chair.
Good morning, sir. Could you please state your name and spell it for the court's sonogram?
It's Vern Anastasio, A -N -A -S -T -A -S -I -O.
We're referring to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
This is a resumptive hearing.
It is.
The order of the hearing will be, you will update us on plans.
There will be public testimony on the updated plans, and Planning Commission will take a recommendation.
So why don't you start, Mr. Anastasio?
Thank you.
I'm going to share my screen. First, we did have a piece of new evidence come in this morning, and I did in fact pass it on to the board upon receipt. It's the letter of support from Council Member Lozada's office.
It's the letter of support from Council Member Lozada's office for the property as we present.
And that, of course, also reflects the support from the neighbors and the RCO.
This is my 57 -page zoning packet.
And we're going to get to the revised plan.
And I'm going to bring on the architect, Mr. David MacArthur, to walk you through the plan.
And if David could raise his virtual hand.
mr chair it's also my understanding that my one of my clients uh is here today and if that's the
case at the end of this i would like him to adopt my presentation as his own testimony for today's
and the prior hearing if you would be so kind
Mr. Chair, would you like to swear Mr. McArthur in?
just hold on one minute please um the chair is experiencing some technical difficulties
we'll be right back with you
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you for your patience, everyone.
The chair should be back on shortly.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Yes, welcome back, Chair.
Joe, I proceed, Mr. Chair.
I think you're muted.
You're a little quiet.
Why don't we start?
Just to get it started.
There you go.
Thank you.
I do have the architect online, if we could swear him in, please.
Please.
You swear for him to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but truth?
Please state your name.
My name is David McArthur, D -A -V -I -D -M -C -A -R -T -H -U -R.
Please proceed, sir.
Thank you.
David, I'm going to keep the plans up here, and I'll move them accordingly to your direction. If you could please walk the board through the revised plan.
Absolutely. So as you know, the proposed project is a two -family dwelling. It has one unit on the bottom floor and basement that's about 1 ,100 square feet. It's a two -bedroom, two -bath unit. This was revised per the board's comment at the last hearing that they thought a three -bedroom unit on the lower level seemed a little tight, so we did make that a little more spacious.
The upper unit on the second and third floors is a three -bedroom, three -bath unit of about 1 ,200 square feet.
The upper unit on the second and third floors is a three bedroom, three bath unit.
I guess starting on the first floor, you can see that we have one bedroom, one bath, and the kitchen space and dining space for the unit.
The basement contains a second bedroom at the front of the unit, a bathroom, furnace space.
We have trash storage underneath the stairs, laundry, and then a living space at the rear of the basement unit.
The rear of the first floor also has a recess in the building to accommodate an accessory parking space at the rear.
On the second floor, we have sort of a mirror to the first floor.
Then we have a bedroom at the front, kitchen, and then a combined living dining area at the rear of the space.
there's also um trash storage at the base of the stairs to the third floor uh on the third floor
we have a bedroom at the front and back and then each with a um bathroom in the middle as well as
laundry space and uh space for the furnace and utilities and then the rooftop and then a rooftop
deck which would be accessible to the upper unit since the first floor unit has the um rear the
rear space of the building and then i don't know if we want to go to the front um i can
talk about the elevation some so it's a pretty standard um brick facade the bay would be um
done in a siding and then the rear and um sides would also be um done in siding as well and then
the site plan you can kind of see the um that it's a uh through block uh property and the rear
accessory parking would be accessed from the um reese street at the rear of the building
and that would be um about it if anyone has any uh questions concerning the
mr anastasia is that your presentation yes it is questions from the board
yeah yeah i have a question a couple questions what's the height of the ceiling in the basement
and what's the what's the depth below grade uh the height of the ceiling in the basement
i believe we have at um eight six and the depth below grade should be um yeah let's check something
here real quick
and the depth below grade would be about um six feet below grade to the basement slab
and what's the um what's the um the width of the uh egress well from the from the bedroom in the
basement oh it would be on the front it would be six feet wide and then the living space on
the rear we have a three foot well what's what's the six feet wide but what's the width what's the
what's the depth oh the depth is three feet and um i believe about six inches of that is recessed
INTO THE STRUCTURE, WHICH IS DUE TO REQUIREMENTS FOR STREETS ENCOURAGEMENT.
OKAY. CAN YOU ZOOM INTO THAT? BECAUSE IT'S HARD TO SEE.
ON THE SITE PLAN, MR. JOHNSON?
ON THE SITE PLAN, YES.
LET ME KNOW IF YOU NEED MORE.
okay so okay so you've got three feet to the outside of the uh i guess the retaining wall
of the egress well and then you've got your five foot uh pavement and another two feet okay
at streets reviewing this or no uh yes they have okay and they have um approved it as uh shown
Okay. And your egress well in the back is three feet, you said?
Yes, it's three feet by three feet, and that projects the rear yard of the space.
Okay. It looked a little tight next to the stairway in the back from the kitchen, but...
All right. Thank you.
The questions from the board.
Questions or comments from our attorney, Hillary Amberson?
I just wanted to note for the record, Mr. Anastasia, I think I emailed you previously.
If you want the board to adopt these revised plans, we do need a proviso form, assuming they grant.
That'll be worth coming.
All right. Thank you.
Mr. Chair, before you had technical difficulty, I did advise that I believe Mr. Andrew Friedman is in the audience.
He is one of my clients, and if he is here, I would like him to adopt our presentation today and the previously presented presentation as well.
Friedman?
Andrew Friedman has been allowed to speak.
Hi, how are you, Chair? How are you, Board?
Hi, could you please state your name and spell for the stenographer?
Hi, could you please state your name? It's Bellford, the stenographer.
Andrew Friedman.
Andrew Friedman, A -N -D -R -E -W, last name Friedman, F -R -I -E -D -M -A -N.
We are affirmed to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
Please proceed, sir.
Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Mr. Friedman, did you hear the presentation today?
I did.
Is it true and accurate to the best of your knowledge?
Do you adopt this and any previous presentation I've made to the board as your own testimony?
Thank you.
Mr. Chair, we've already presented the difficulty of the block and the property, the adjacent property that triggers this strange 13 -foot setback requirement is now a unicorn on that block.
And for that reason, and with the hope that we've satisfied some of the design questions, I respectfully request the granting of the variance.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
I see no hands at this time, Chair.
Chair, I do have one more question.
Yeah, sure, go ahead.
Is there a curb cut in the back?
Is that part of the application also?
Is that existing?
I believe it was a new curb cut, but this was approved by the streets department for that location.
Okay, all right.
I also appreciate the changes you made to the basement unit.
Thank you.
Questions or comments? Planning, please.
I move one with the Planning Commission.
The comprehensive plan recommends no change in zoning to the existing Aurobine residential multifamily zoning at this location.
The plan's application matches the character of the block base.
The majority of the structures, nine versus five, have no setbacks.
Planning Commission recommends with the Board grant their request of dimensional variance for front yard setback.
Thank you.
We're right with you. Here we go.
MI 2024 -002 -348 -2049 North Rudolph Street. I vote yes.
Michael John.
Mr. Chair, there are revised plans.
With revised plan, one page stamp by ZBA on October 22nd, 2024.
Michael Johns, my vote is yes with the revised plans.
Cheryl Gaston, my vote is yes.
Ms. Gaston, is that with proviso?
Thank you.
I win.
My vote is yes with proviso.
It's not a gram.
My vote is yes with proviso.
Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.
Mr. Chair, I just want to note that Mr. Shahid has now joined us.
Thank you, Mr. Shahid.
Hold on a minute here.
Mr. Shahid, can you hear us?
Yes. Yes, I can hear you.
OK, thank you.
MI 2024, 005 -342 -1901 North American Street. Augusta O 'Neill is the attorney. An appeal against L &I. And Leonard Reuter, please.
Cher, I'm recusing myself from this.
Yes, sir. Mr. Johns, thank you.
Augusta O 'Neill and Leonard Ruger will be joining us as a panelist.
we see them
yes chair i did promote them to penalists i do see leonard booter has joined
it looks like it may be um hercules grigos that is um presenting the case on behalf of the applicant
okay i see he has his hand raised oh he lowered it
afternoon members of the board thank you very much
um could you please sure please state your name and spell for the stenographer thank you
hercules gregos h -e -r -c -u -l -e -s last name g -r -i -g -o -s you swear to tell the truth the
Hercules Grigos, H -E -R -C -U -L -E -S, last name.
whole truth and nothing but the truth i do mr reuter please uh thank you may please the board
leonard f reuter r -e -u -t -e -r senior attorney city of philadelphia sure
Do you prefer to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing about the truth?
This is the complaint against LNI Council.
Hercules, you start your presentation, please.
Great. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Hercules Griegos, Claire Harrison, representing BRIC, 1901 North American LP, owner of the property located at 1901 -75 North American Street.
uh this case is is uh fashioned as an appeal against lni but essentially we're here today
asking the board to extend a zoning permit for this project on september 16 2020 uh the board
granted approval to construct a mixed -use building with ground floor commercial spaces
and 286 multifamily units uh the project is presented in 2020 had input of all interested
community stakeholders and uh i guess i would say it was it was sort of designed by committee
during 2020 a design process took place we got feedback from hispanic chamber of commerce apm
assay uh went through cdr um norris square community action network councilman maria
sanchez's office and the norris square community community association um you know this was in the
throes of the COVID -19 pandemic. We moved forward to try to bring in an investor to help us construct
the project because this was the largest project my client had ever attempted. As we went through
the process, what we realized was a lot of design rendered the building inconstructible. It just
wasn't feasible to construct. So I would say in the beginning of 2023, we engaged, I guess it was
late 2022, we engaged Rustin Oller from Harman Deutsch to help us with the design to make this
building feasible. We basically reduced the size of the building, decreased the occupied area from
96 % to 88%, decreased FAR slightly and GFA slightly, decreased the height from 77 feet
to 73 feet, decreased the number of multifamily dwellings from 286 to 285, and increased the
parking spaces from 93 to 98 spaces, and increased the open area from 3 .8 % to 11 .3%, as well
as increasing the commercial space from 10 ,000 square feet to 12 ,000 square feet.
this was all done basically value engineer and make the building constructible and be able to
bring in an investor. We had gone down the road with one investor and as the market began to turn
they pulled out of the deal and then we started the conversation with others and if you remember
that's when interest rates went sky high and deals began to just not make sense.
So my client, you know, went back and basically went dormant for a bit,
tried to figure out what to do.
And recently we got a new investor that is prepared to move this forward.
The investor has built 1 ,500 units in the city, 40 different projects.
is committed has put the dollars necessary to bring this and permit this uh this project um
i want to raise a couple important things um we worked really hard in 2020 to get a community
benefits agreement with the community um of the 285 units um we had 28 affordable units uh 10
at 40 % AMI, 10 at 50 % AMI, and 8 at 60 % AMI. We worked really hard with the neighbors and with
the community to get to those numbers. So our new investors were committed to moving this forward.
We have the community benefits agreement still in place. And we worked with the RCO part of other
terms in the community benefits agreement, agreeing to work with the RCO for the affordable
units to offer them to residents in the existing zip code, consulting with the Hispanic chamber,
the African -American chamber, and the RCO to make sure that we hire community members for
construction -related positions and have an inclusive construction process, target 40 %
of post -construction positions at the building for local residents, and then among other things in the CBA.
Um, and then, uh, uh, among other things in the, in the CBA, um, uh, we're going to look to lease, uh, commercial spaces on American street to small private businesses.
Uh, we met with, uh, Norris square, uh, action network.
They're in support of the extension, um, councilwoman Lozada.
Oh, I guess I should be presenting.
I'm giving you the story, but I'll give you, it's been a minute.
I'll give you the, uh, let's see.
if i may share thank you um here's our letter of support from councilwoman
um our letter of support from nara square action
and then here's just the site context project is a north american street between burks
and west nara street um here's some site photos um and this these are site photos from when we
through cdr um and then just here's the permitting history um and this is the site plan and i'll just
show some some of the uh these are the highlights of the community benefits agreement as i just
described this is all in the packet um and then uh here's some just some of the older renderings
the building so um we asked the board um uh grant us an extension um we uh we have we're we need
about a year plus to get the building permit issued but the project is um ready to go and
i have my client scott baldassera here who can answer any questions or respond
but again in discussion with mr reuter we fashioned this as an appeal against l and i because
The zoning board under the code has authority to grant extensions.
With that, I'm happy to answer any questions or turn it over to my client, and he can adopt my testimony.
His name is Scott Baldessare.
It should be in the audience.
Why don't we let him adopt your testimony, and then we'll go to Mr. Reuter.
What's his name, Baldessare?
Baldessari, yes, sir.
Mr. Baldessari.
Hey, good morning, Mr. Chair.
This is Scott.
Hi, could you please state your name and spell it for the court stenographer?
It's Scott, S -C -O -T -T, Baldessari, B -A -L -D -A -S -A -R -E.
You're affirmed to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
Please proceed, counsel.
Scott, you heard my testimony today.
Do you affirm and adopt it as your own?
I do, yes.
Mr. Chairman or Mr. Reuter, we're available to answer any questions.
All right.
Mr. Reuter, would you present your case?
So just to clarify the process here, the procedural status of where we are, as Mr. Griegos pointed out in his presentation, back in 20...
so this was a permit that was originally issued in 2020 there was amendments uh there was another
actually another attempt at an amendment uh that that didn't go through uh because it didn't get
approval of the streets department so i don't think that's really relevant here but in 2023
the zoning board did grant a one -year extension so this permit was already going to expire
around i think september 2023 they granted the one -year extension already as back then
which means that the actual expiration is well now was September of 2024 so they came in and
they asked for an additional extension this time asking for three years which isn't you know
frankly isn't even contemplated in the code to extend a permit by three years and again what
we're talking about is extending the board's approval because again as we understand this
we all understand this project was a board approved project because it needed a variance
excuse me so they came in and asked for a three -year extension after one year had already
been granted that was ministerially or administratively denied by boards council
uh i agree they have a right to appeal from that the question was how do you
how do you do an appeal from something like that and so we agreed that they could just uh
Because they received a letter from L &I, which essentially repeated the administrative decision to deny the requested extension, we agreed to just treat that letter from L &I as the quote -unquote decision that could be appealed here to the board.
So where we are is that, again, they're asking for an extension, a three -year extension.
uh a three -year extension you know technically the code doesn't even contemplate the board
you know technically the code
extending an approval by three years there's some exceptions not really exceptions but there
are different types of prop uh projects called you know where there's phase development and
things like that where permits can you know essentially uh go on for up to seven years
i do note that i think earlier i think about the same time that the original permit was issued
if Mr. Grigos can correct me, there was a separate zoning permit that had been applied for to do the lot consolidation and demolition.
Presumably, although it wasn't actually addressed in 2023, it's a little bit ambiguous.
If you look at the 2023 letter from from from L &I or the board, presumably that demolition,
The zoning permit for the demolition and lot consolidation also was extended.
Again, lot consolidation just took place.
I think that was by right.
The demolition, technically that demolition, that zoning permit to authorize a demolition
also would have expired after three years.
Presumably that had not been marked expired.
And I believe, and Mr. Grigos can correct me if I'm wrong, but just within the last
couple weeks uh the actual demolition permit has been uh applied for uh and that's the kind of
thing uh had that demolition permit been applied for in september uh or early september i think
there would have been a stronger argument that that vests the new construction the zoning permit
for new construction so you know again uh on its face the code doesn't really authorize a three -year
extension um but you know given that i think there's some timing issues here there may have
also been a fire i'm not sure about that um i know that there have been a history of violations
at the property the city clip has had to go out to the site i think five times in the past few
years uh to remove weeds uh i think there was also a clean and seal of the existing building
that was there um i'm not sure about that leonard what clean seal yeah i mean i don't know whatever's
out there but uh i think there again i think there's multiple structures that were still out
at the site. But there was definitely clip work that had been done at the site. Anyway, that being
said, you know, we'll leave it to the discretion of the board and board's council, whether the
board even, again, let me put it this way. We're not objecting to an extension on principle or any
of that. I'm just simply pointing out that it's not clear to me that the code provides the board
this kind of authority uh to grant an extension of this length i think again you know given the
timing of everything had the project started and even if even the demolition itself had the
demolition started um just a couple months before today uh this probably would be moot um so we'd
leave it to the uh to the board's discretion whether or not they want to grant this extension
uh certainly i don't think the city's we're not going to appeal it uh a decision by the board
that way and i would just you know uh basically defer to to the board and board's council i just
wanted to point out that the code doesn't really provide for this um for what they're asking for
that's is which is i mean i appreciate that and i think um really what we i think we have
applied for three years really what we need is 18 months i just want to be clear i'm sorry
Right. We need 18 months what we need to get through a building permit and get to that point.
So, you know, we we we apply just to re -up as part of our application.
But that's what I think is everyone was aware to get through the building permit process.
We have design streets department, et cetera. Sure.
And and again, I like I said, we'll defer to the decision and the discretion of the board.
Again, our only concern is that where it would be nice to be able to tie an extension to specific actions in this type of appeal, I don't believe the board has the authority to grant the request with provisos.
They can either grant it or not, or presumably they can grant a shorter extension.
I mean, if they can grant an extension at all, I guess it's up to them how long they want it to be.
But I don't know that they can add additional conditions like as long as you get your building permit by X date or something like that.
so again i'm just gonna i just wanted to point out what the code provides and leave it up to the
leave it up to the board i would say if you extended it for you know 18 months we have
that time to get a building permit you know under the code is typical so um we're prepared to move
We're prepared to move forward.
forward. They said we've met with the neighbors. We have a
We've met with the neighbors.
We had a very robust CBA that we spent a lot of time to negotiate, and we were constantly
getting calls from the community asking us, when can we start?
And for reasons that my client will take responsibility for some of them, but really
the reasons out of his control, interest rates and things, we're looking to develop this
property.
Our partner is able to build all the affordable units and we can get some strong affordable units in this neighborhood at 40 percent, 50 percent of AMI, which I don't think that's been done on American Street yet.
So happy to answer them.
All right. Thank you to both of you.
What we're going to do with this is we're going to vote on this next Wednesday at 930.
I want to take it back to the executive group when we meet our executive meetings and we'll also talk to our council.
So we'll vote on this next Wednesday at 930.
Thank you to both of you.
Thank you.
Thank you very much.
All right.
I'm going to go to number one.
MI 2023 -005 -047 -209 West Cheston Hill Avenue.
This is a resumptive hearing.
Good morning, Mr. Chairman and members of the board.
Adam Laver, Blankrow.
Just for the record, spell your name, please.
Adam Laver, L -A -V -E -R.
You're affirmed. Tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
Yes, Mr. Chairman, I do.
David Feynman, available, please.
Chair, I see no one in the audience by that name,
but I do have two hands up.
Yeah, the RCCB Philo litigation,
because I believe that that will be their conference room.
Okay, thank you. They have been promoted to panelists.
Mr. Feynman
I think I am on at this point Mr. Chairman
Mr. Chairman David Feynman
we represent the Protestants in this matter
my understanding
just for the record Mr. Feynman
spell your name for the stenographer
although probably everyone knows your name
So that's F -I -N -E -M -A -N.
We're a firm to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.
I do. And this is a resumptive hearing. And, you know, my understanding after talking to Hillary, you will read five statements into the record.
We will have the Planning Commission make a recommendation and then written closing statements will come from both parties.
And that is due Friday, November 1st. Is that correct?
That's my understanding from Ms. Emerson.
Mr. Laver, do you understand that too?
Yes, Mr. Chairman.
So, Mr. Feynman, why don't you start?
The first, as I had told the board previously, we are prepared to present witnesses through statements that I have.
Some of the witnesses are with me today and can affirm those statements.
Others are basically in the virtual audience.
So the first one comes from Brad Bank and Daryl Stoner.
They are husband and wife, 130 West Chestnut Hill Avenue.
Let me begin.
My wife and I live at 130 West Chestnut Hill Avenue, only 10 feet further than the 250 targeted distance from the subject property.
and within the mentioned boundary between Kreppfeld and Seminole Avenue on Chestnut Hill Avenue.
We object to the variance requests in this position.
The basis of this objection is that we feel that additional buildings sought by the applicant,
the disturbance of steep slopes requested in order to build a pool and move the septic field are unnecessary
and will alter and adversely impact the character of the neighborhood.
changing sight lines of the mansion
Changing sight lines of the mansion, added density, doubling the number of residents' cars using the driveway at 209 would alter the appearance and character of this historic mansion.
added density
Of equal importance is the absence of any hardship that is required for variances.
There is no difficulty or hardship of land which would prevent Greylock Mansion.
It was built and currently exists.
There are no circumstances which prevent it from being viable and valuable as it currently exists.
Similar properties in Chestnut Hill bound, specifically the Fitz, Eugene Dixon House at 9002 Creffield,
20 ,000 square feet or five acres, 400 feet away from 209, has been beautifully restored.
8811 Gwenda, T -O -W -A -N -D, a street 300 feet away, historically restored with several acres.
700 West Mermaid Lane, the so -called K -R -I -S -H -E -I -M estate, or Erdenheim Farm Estate, property on Hartwell Lane,
currently on the market at over $8 million,
and many more Chestnut Hill mansions are all valuable and viable properties.
Nothing about 209 West Chestnut Hill Avenue would prevent such a restoration and return of value,
particularly for the price of the current owner paid and is invested.
There is simply no hardship on this property, which should allow the requested variances.
Mr. Bank is here.
Mr. Bank, do you affirm the testimony that I have just read?
I affirm.
Excuse me, can we swear in Mr. Bank, please?
Thank you.
Mr. Bank, please state your name and spell for the court stenographer.
Brad Bank, B -R -A -D, last name Bank, B -A -N -K.
Affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
Thank you, sir.
Mr. Bank, should I ask the question again, Mr. Chairman, or are you okay?
Ask it again, please.
Mr. Bank, you've heard the testimony that I've just read.
Do you affirm that testimony?
I affirm that testimony.
Should I proceed, Mr. Chairman?
Mr. Chairman, I would -
Mr. Layman, do you have anything to say?
I do, and I think it would be probably most efficient, with the board's permission,
just to speak after each statement has been read briefly.
In other words, there's going to be a statement
rather than cross -examination, as I understand it.
Is that what you're suggesting, Mr. Laver?
I'm fine with just making two statements
as to this particular statement that was read.
May I proceed, Mr. Turman?
Please proceed.
Thank you.
The statement was made that Brad Bank and Daryl Stoner are 10 feet beyond the city notice requirement.
I'd just like to share with the board, as previously submitted, this map showing that at the closest point, they are 301 feet away from the subject property.
And in determining the credibility and relevance of this submitted statement, the board needs to consider that they are 301 feet away from the property at the closest point, and under the law, are they an interested and aggrieved party?
The Philadelphia City Planning Commission's RCO, near -neighbor determination, provides notice to those within 250 feet.
The second statement that I would like to make is that neither the pool nor the septic system have disturbed steep slopes, as the record shows.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman and members of the board.
Thank you very much.
Can I just ask, Mr. Bank happens to be here.
Mr. Bank, did you measure it?
I measured it, but I'm not going to dispute 50 feet.
The way I measured it, it was 10.
I have nothing further.
All right, thank you.
Please proceed.
The statement would be from David Dannenberg.
Mr. Dannenberg, can you hear me?
I believe you're either by Zoom or by telephone.
Is that correct, Mr. Dannenberg?
Do we see Mr. Dannenberg's hand?
Do we see Mr. Dannenberg's hand?
Thank you.
Yes, Mr. Dannenberg has his hand raised.
Yes, Mr. Dannenberg has been allowed to speak.
Mr. Dannenberg, could you please state your name and spell for the court stenographer?
David Dannenberg, D -A -N -N -E -N -B -E -R -G, first name David, D -A -V -I -D.
All right, you swear for him to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
Counsel, why don't you proceed reading the letter, and what we'll do with him is he'll adopt your testimony, okay?
That's correct.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Dannenberg lives at 7000 Wissahickon Avenue in Philadelphia.
Although I do not live in the immediate vicinity of the Greylock Estate, I have interest in and knowledge of the property and its place in an immediate neighborhood adjacent to a school,
the Wissahick and Park, and situated on an important but narrow vehicular corridor.
I taught at the Krefeld School for close to a decade and a half, beginning in the fall of 1999.
I subsequently served on the Krefeld School's Board of Trustees for nine years, beginning in 2015
and ending this June after exhausting the term limits set by the school's bylaws.
I still serve on the board's physical plant committee.
During my time teaching at the school, I commuted through the Wissahickon by foot and bicycle throughout all seasons and led weekly community service work there with Creffield students.
I served on the board of the Friends of Wissahickon for 17 years, actively engaged in the work
of conservation, helping to steer and initiate policy and capital projects, as well as maintaining
active engagement in a wide range of fieldwork.
My home sits on two and a half acres bordering the Wissahickon Park, recognizing the aesthetic
and ecological importance of conservation along the edges of the park.
I obtained a conservation easement. I rest easier knowing that they cannot exploit the property to the detriment of the neighborhood and park because the easement will forever preclude subdivision and extensive development of the property, assuming the terms of the easement are enforced by the easement holder and upheld by government agencies.
The neighborhoods of West Mount area and Chestnut Hill are characterized by minimally developed greenland, both private and public.
Much of the area in these neighborhoods are notable for their trees as much as their buildings.
The Wissahickon Park itself seems to bleed into the neighborhoods.
There are vast areas of park where no houses or buildings can be seen, even though the view from the park includes a great deal of private land.
That is, the experience of being in the park is dependent upon the character of the lands outside the park itself.
This particular proposal to develop the Greylock Estate would place several large modern suburban buildings within direct view of a major trail in the park that I believe hosts thousands of visits each week.
The obstruction of this view by buildings would amount to an encroachment onto the public land and is anyway explicitly prohibited by the legally binding easements that govern the development of the Greylock Estate.
Moreover, the park was created not only to preserve its beauty and provide refuge from the bakeries of urban life, but in large part to protect the water that flows into the Wissahickon Creek, because the Wissahickon Creek provides around a third of the city's drinking water.
This is true of the conservation easement on the Greylock property, as well as the Wissahickon Watershed overlay that the current proposal seeks to violate.
They exist in part to protect the Wissahickon Creek.
When the park was created, the concept of watershed was not well established and understood, and resources were limited.
For these reasons, the Wissahickon Park does not by itself protect all the water that flows into the creek.
Properties that lie within the watershed but outside of the park are responsible for a great deal of the water that feeds the creek.
When those properties become degraded by the creation of impervious surfaces, roofs, driveways, roads, the quality of the water in the creek and the quality, that is, of our drinking water suffers.
Further, when the percolation is interrupted, the creek is subject to extremes of flooding following by periods of historically low water that disrupt the ecology of the park and further degrade the water quality.
the ecology of the park and further degrade the water quality. The proposal, even with elaborate
stormwater management system, it necessitates to almost certainly exasperate the quality and flow
of the Wissaken Creek. The most focused and immediate impact of this development
would be the Krefeld School. The development would be catastrophic for the continuing
operations of Crethold School, an institution that has been a positive presence and good neighbor
in this community for nearly 50 years. As an aside, it should be noted that this has been
a school at this location since 1922. This predates probably by decades, the zoning code
certainly in its current iteration. I mention this because the applicant's lawyer attempted
to draw an analogy between the school being granted zoning variances in the past and this
developer seeking variances. It's one thing to grant a zoning variance to a new use in a currently
zoned property. It's entirely different matter to grant a variance to an existing use when the
zoning rules change. To my knowledge, the variances previously obtained by the Krefeld School
and referenced by Council at the last hearing fall into the latter category,
while the current proposal for Greylock constitutes the former. The developer wants to change a single
family home that is zoned as a single family home into 15 residences and seeks zoning variances to
achieve this. Location of the Krefeld School has served as a school since nearly everyone at this
hearing was born. Further, it should be noted that many single -family homes of similar size and
stature exist within a short distance of the Greylock property. More important, the current
functioning of the Krefeld School depends on disposition of nearby properties, most especially
the Greylock Estate, the school's largest neighbor. The board and administration of the school
have been acutely aware of the legal restrictions on the Greylock property, both by zoning and the
conservation easements, and have assumed those would protect it. It is important to note that
on November 28, 2022. The school made the largest financial commitment in its history
when it acquired land to bolster this protection. Before describing that investment, I will
describe the current situation and profound impact this project would have on the school's
ability to function. The school occupies an 18th century mansion with additions and outbuildings.
There's no air conditioning, so the windows open whenever the weather allows it. Further,
a great deal of teaching and other daily activities takes place outdoors,
both on campus and in the adjacent Wissahecken Park. Following the construction, there will be
a markedly increased traffic flow and loss of privacy. Right now, the school has an effective
buffering between itself and its neighbors. Currently, no classroom is approximately 100
feet of an active driveway other than the school's. No class space is within, I would guess,
well over 100 feet of anyone's bedroom other than Krefeld's staff who live on campus.
This project would put unaffiliated driveway and bedrooms within a few
dozen feet of our classrooms and our heavily utilized outdoor space.
This would profoundly impact our students' ability to learn and our staff's ability to support them.
By the same token, the proximity of the school to Tony residential condominiums will affect quality of life in those residences.
Schools, by their nature, sometimes affect surrounding houses, principally through the noise of daily operation.
Over nearly half a century, that's 50 years, Krefeld has earned and enjoys a great deal of support from the near neighbors.
But none of them reside 15 feet from any part of the campus where a lot of activity takes place.
The school has long recognized the importance of protecting the land around it.
The school has long recognized the importance of protecting the land around it in order to continue and to be seen as a good neighbor and in order to preserve the character of the neighborhood.
The school has mostly relied on the heretofore impendurable integrity of the easements and low -density zoning to protect the nature of Greylock Estate.
the school's largest neighbor. That said, members of the administration and board of trustees have
long recognized a potential link, chink, in the armor of easements and zoning adjacent to the
school and Creckold School. Backing on to the Greylock Estate sits Greylock's former gatehouse
alongside the driveway. Many decades ago, it was divided from the estate and made a private
residential home. We believed that if an owner of Greylock were to gain control of the gatehouse
property and reopen access through it to Greylock, they could attempt to get around some of the
development restrictions. Were this to have occurred, the school would have been surrounded
on two sides by Greylock development with an active driveway to the property mere feet from
the campus. The school was therefore desirous of owning the gatehouse, and it built a good
relationship with previous owners, who were themselves conservation and preservation -minded
people. When those owners decided to move, they contacted the school directly about purchasing
it. We all recognize, for reasons just mentioned, the gatehouse property had value to a prospective
developer of the Greylock estate, far beyond what it would otherwise have given in size,
condition, and location. Indeed, the sellers told us that aspiring developers of the Greylock
property had offered them a great deal of money over the market value for the property for just
this reason. Those owners turned down the developers. Thanks to those owners, public
spirited nature and some generous donors, the school was able to purchase the property for less
than what the developers had offered, but at a cost well above market value for a house of that
size, condition, and location in Chestnut Hill, adjacent to Busick and Park. As stated previously,
it was purchased in November 2022 and is now used as the resonance of the CEO of the school
and I would add who has testified previously.
The school did this to protect the integrity of its campus
and preventing otherwise unallowable building and traffic
and to support the quality of life of the neighborhood and the park.
So important was this purchase to us that the school would have been willing
to mortgage our existing property to complete the purchase.
Consider that.
Krefeld School is a small school with high overhead and no endowment.
Its main asset is its campus.
Yet we felt that if the owners of Greylock gained ownership of the gatehouse,
it would constitute such an existential threat to our continued operation
that we would have been willing to take on an enormous large debt to prevent it.
Now that the school has taken this extraordinary step,
made this enormous contribution to ensure not only its future, but the physical integrity of
the neighborhood, we face what we had believed was an unthinkable scenario. The intense
overdeveloped development of the legally protected property next door, a development that absolutely
threatens the long -term existence of the school. It's incredibly disheartening that after 50 years
of good neighborhood stewardship, after a huge investment to extend that stewardship,
an important educational institution is to be trampled upon merely so that an out -of -town
developer can make an outside profit on a real estate investment. The current school community
represents the hopes of close to 100 families whose children attend and the livelihoods of
over 30 dedicated staff. We ask that the ZVA consider the opposition by an impact when these
130 people and their families
along with every single near
neighbor who proposes this property
I strongly
urge you to turn down the variances
requested by Greylock
Mr. Dannenberg you've heard
the testimony that
I've read into the record
you adopt
Do you adopt that testimony as your testimony?
that testimony as your testimony
Thank you.
Mr. Lavery, you have comments, I should say.
I do, Mr. Chairman.
We wholeheartedly object to the reading of this prejudicial statement into the record that is based on speculation, factual inaccuracies, and attempted commentary on legalities.
The statement itself, Mr. Chairman and members of the board, states that Mr. Dannenberg lives at 7000 Wissahickon Avenue, about three miles away.
Mr. Dannenberg does not speak on behalf of Creffield School.
He is neither an officer nor a board member of the school.
As the statement states, he's a former teacher.
This is entirely prejudicial and should be stricken from the record.
Thank you for your comments.
We will take your comments into consideration.
Counsel, you want to move on to your next letter?
Yes, sure.
Is Mr. Heisinger in the virtual audience?
H -I -E -S -I -N -G -E -R.
I see no one in the audience with that name.
How about Ms. O 'Brien, Linda O 'Brien?
Are you in the virtual audience, Ms. O 'Brien?
Yes, Linda O 'Brien has been allowed to speak.
Good morning.
Could you please state your name and spell for the stenographer?
Good morning. It's Linda O 'Brien, L -I -N -D -A -O -B -R -I -E -N.
Where or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
We never put up the truth.
Please proceed, counsel.
This is a statement of Ms. O 'Brien.
I'm a resident owner of 434 West Cheston Hill Avenue
and want to register my objections to the proposal before the board with respect to 209 West Chesson Hill Avenue property
and the zoning application as presented.
Specifically, I believe the proposal did not present information upon which anybody or this board could justify making any recommendation.
The proposal for a fourth floor seems hasty and ill -prepared without the thought to how it integrates with the property, which is odd since the developer has had months since various meetings to formulate a comprehensive plan to be passed on by both the various committees as well as by this board.
The additional buildings in the back now look like a prison yard with only narrow views of the park.
I further oppose the plan, which is not conditional upon currently existing conservation or preservation easements on the property being met,
and would allow the developer to construct any additional structures on the property other than in the existing structures of the main house and carriage house.
I further oppose any amendments, modifications, or extinguishment of the conservation and or preservation easements on the property without adequate additional conservation value being given for such amendments, modification, or extinguishment.
I would also suggest the developer required to take the dead trees down on this property as a jester of good faith.
And that is the statement of Ms. O 'Brien.
Ms. O 'Brien, do you accept that statement, that testimony, as your testimony?
Thank you.
Mr. Laver?
Just two things, Mr. Chairman and members of the board.
The statement indicates that Ms. O 'Brien resides at 434 West Chestnut Hill Avenue.
This document exhibit that I have shared with the board shows that her residence at its
closest point is 979 feet away from the subject property at its closest point.
She is not under the law an aggrieved party.
Also, the statement indicates that the development team has contemplated a fourth floor for the
proposed development. That is factually incorrect, as the record shows. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
That is factually incorrect, as the record shows.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Counsel, your next letter.
Yes, I have.
And he's sitting with me, so there is no need to go into the virtual audience.
I have a statement of Costa Rodriguez.
Mr. Rodriguez, could you please, how about if I swear him in so that you can adopt the testimony afterwards?
I think that that's correct.
Could you please state your name and spell for the court stenographer?
Yes, my name is Costa Rodriguez, C -O -S -T -A, Rodriguez, R -O -D -R -I -G -U -E -D.
I swear.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Please proceed, counsel.
I am Costa Rodriguez. I live at 7615 Martins Lane, Philadelphia in the Chesson Hill area.
I have, over the last four years, acted as an agent for JBAS Realty LLT, a company involved in real estate development.
the principal of who is John, I'm going to spell the last name, Mr. Chairman, B -A -S -A -L -Y -G -A.
JBAS is well -financed and has developed over a 30 -year period, many Victorian homes, loft spaces,
shopping malls, a 100 -room hotel, and more recently, large 19th and 20th century nursing homes.
We're going to show you, at this point, some documents which Mr. Rodriguez has made available.
Attached and a part of my testimony is a proposal under date of February 8, 2024, addressed to Core States Capital, and it's a Roman numeral 9, LLC, for the purchase of Greylock Estates.
The property before this board, this proposal anticipated the development of only two existing buildings known as, quote, the mansion, end quote, and the, quote, carriage house, end quote.
into a total of five condominium units, consisting of four units in the mansion and one unit in the carriage house.
In addition, JBAS Realty LLC intended to build a 2 ,000 -square -foot pool pavilion with cabanas in between the round circle in front of Glalock's main entrance and in the direction of the Lavender Trail, which I would add has been referred to numerous times,
which is on the Wissahickon Creek, all within the 6 ,000 -square -foot impervious ground allotment
and respecting the setbacks from the front of the property.
The remainder of the property would stay undeveloped or placed back in a condition
that would be acceptable to purchasers of the condominium, condominiums, I should say,
After inspection of the property, it was clear there was little, if any, maintenance that had been done to the property for some time.
Therefore, a great deal of money would need to be expended to have the property look in a condition for the sale of condominiums in the so -called, quote, mansion, end quote, and, quote, carriage house, end quote.
It should be noted that J .B .A .S.'s intentions is in keeping and maintaining and developing only Greylock's mansion and carriage house.
We can show you what our revised offers.
It should be noted that Mr. Shankman stated in the last meeting that he had no bonafide
officers while Greylock was listed for sale in 2021.
That's incorrect.
We have, I can show you, Redfin's analysis.
I assume the board is familiar with Redfin, a real estate listing company that lists sales and prospective sales on a regular basis throughout the United States.
on a regular basis throughout the United States.
Of his, then, we see the analysis of his offers in 2021.
Prior, this is before JBSS offers in October 21,
which was never listed on Redfin because he removed the listing at the end of October 21.
The other offers in 2021 were substantial enough to be listed as contingent and pending sales, which stopped activity for some time.
We're happy to make available to you correspondence and the Redfin analysis that we had that were referred to in Mr. Rodriguez's statement.
Mr. Rodriguez, you've been sworn. Do you accept the testimony, the reading of what I've said as your testimony?
Yes, I affirm that the testimony is correct.
Mr. Laver.
Thank you.
Mr. Chair, was Mr. Rodriguez sworn in?
Okay. All right. Thank you.
Once again, we object to this statement, which is replete with inaccuracies and slander.
Core State Capital is not the owner of the subject property.
The statement suggests that inspections occurred this calendar year.
if inspections occurred. It was through trespass. Some references were made to
certain documents, which I have not seen in the record, but I would like to bring up one document
which is in the record, which we've submitted in the record. And this is a document that we
submitted to the Zoning Board of Adjustment on August the 28th from Nigel Richards, the listing
agent for the subject property. And I took the liberty of adding some highlights to show that
Mr. Richards summarized the history of the listing, that he conducted 98 tours, that the property was
placed under contract three or four times. And in all of the instances, the buyers failed to
continue beyond their due diligence. There was never a deposit submitted. Despite that,
some efforts continued to try to engage, but the property was never under contract.
Everything fell through despite best efforts. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and members of the board.
Thank you very much.
Counselor, is your presentation complete?
You did four of your five.
Am I correct?
Just one question.
Just one question, considering what Mr. Labor said.
If I can, just one question.
He's been sworn.
Mr. Rodriguez, is JBAS willing to go through with the deal as you outlined today?
Yes, Mr. JBS Realty offered in October of 2021 $1 ,675 ,000 for Greylock, the two Dalek buildings that have been sitting there for years under the present ownership.
We would offer the same price today.
Thank you. I have nothing further.
Mr. Laver, do you have questions?
I don't want to go back and forth here, but I just must object to that testimony.
It's outside also of the bounds of what had been presented by counsel for the zoning board.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you very much.
Planning Commission.
Chairman, just one last thing that we want to do.
One last thing you want to do.
We have, there's been referred to pictures, we have some pictures of the property that were taken without trespassing on the property or outside the property that we want just the board to have an opportunity to look at.
There are four pictures. We can either put them up on the screen at this point, or we can submit them through, and they were taken outside the property, not trespassed on the property.
Listen to me, listen to me, listen to me. Submit them to our council, and please send a copy to Mr. Laver.
We will do that. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. There is nothing further.
I must just respectfully object on the record to submission of exhibits at this late stage
after many months.
I respect the board's directive, but I need to put that on the record.
i respect the board's directive but i need to put that on the record thank you very much
these pictures were taken recently we're done we're done we're done planning commission
amy board with the planning commission the comprehensive plan recommends no change in
the existing rsd1 single -family detached zoning at this location the proposal for use of the
existing structure represents an adaptive reuse that preserves one of the city's architecturally
distinct buildings and advances the comprehensive plans preservation policies. The appellant has
received a tree waiver instead of requesting a tree replacement variance. The appellant has not
shown that the proposed new building structures A1, A2, and B1 are the minimum necessary variance
to afford economic release of the property. The proposed earth moving plans include restorations
of the slope after construction. The appellant has not demonstrated unique physical conditions
or circumstances that would prevent the provision of accessible parking and rear yard setback.
Therefore, the City Planning Commission recommends that the Board grant the requested variance
for multifamily household living, tree replacement, and steep slope. We recommend that the Board grant
the requested variance for multiple principal uses with proviso, limited to existing structures.
E. We recommend that the Board deny the requested variances for accessible parking and rear yard
setbacks for both councils a written closing statement from each party uh is due by friday
november 1st at the close of business uh thank you both karen just one last thing one last thing
in our in our in our submission we will also say that an alternative similar to what the planning
commission has said i think we're gonna provide those listen to me listen to me no we're finished
I'm finished. Nothing else. Nothing else. We're done when I said that. Okay. And you will both
have it in on November 1st and we will, Hillary will be in touch when we will vote. Okay. Thank
you both. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Have a good day. Right. Thank you. Is there anyone in the
virtual audience whose case has not been called this morning? I see no hands at this time, Chair.
Thanks, everyone.
I'm sure we got done when we said we would get done, and continue to enjoy yourself.
And I'm sorry about my computer mishap, and see everybody tomorrow.
Thank you.
Thank you all.
Have a good day.
Thank you all.
Thank you.