Okay, 8, 2, 10, 11, okay, number 12.
mi 2021 001573 2783 roberts avenue
i'm sorry we continued that i'm sorry
13. MI 2021 003666353 Pemberton Street, Leo Movahill, RCO Queen Village Association,
letter of opposition, letters from Councilman Squillip, comments, there's opposition and
support. It's up. He, his recommendation is the board should make a decision.
Mr. Movihill.
There we go.
Sorry about that, members of the board.
I was having to finish.
Good morning.
Mr. Movihill, you've already been sworn.
Just state your name.
And then our vice chair has a few questions.
Certainly. This is Leo Mulvihill, M-U-L-V-I-H-I-L-L, for the owner, 335 Pemberton Street.
Hi, Mr. Mulvihill. Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
It appears that you've emailed the exhibit packet with all the required documents. Is that correct?
You may proceed.
So, good morning, Chair and members of the Board. I'm here today on behalf of the whole
for the property at 335 Pemberton Street.
For purposes of the record, I have the refusal, appeal, and project information form at page 1.
Area zoning maps at page 7, deed at 9, tax clearance at 14.
Zoning notification letter and proof of bailing at 15, or RCO letter at 42.
Letters of support from neighbors at 44 and continuing through to page, if I recall correctly, 94.
And then we have photos of the property at 95.
So members of the board, essentially what we're looking to do, my client, Rahul, after going through the zoning code himself, believed that he could add an addition to the rear of his property in the rear yard and started construction on that.
He then became aware that, unfortunately, he needed to go through the zoning process for it, and that's where we are right now.
Looking to page 7 of my packet, you can see that we're in an RM1 district.
To page 8, you can see the overhead shot of my client's property.
So we're right at basically a 4th in Pemberton.
What I'll do next is I'll get to, there's our tax clearance showing only 22 taxes are owed.
So notification letter and then all the proof of mailings that were sent out.
Queen Village Neighbors Association Board ultimately opposed the project.
However, as I stated in my record, we have numerous letters of support which were contained in the packet as well.
that was sent over by Councilman Skoa from neighbors who are nearby.
Specifically, what was sent over is a neighbor that is immediately next door
to Mr. Geneson and Mr. Pathy.
uh to Mr. Geneson and Mr. Pathy we have an agreement with them as well that they support
We have an agreement with them as well that they support this project.
this project as well so we have all of these letters of support beginning again at page 45
and continuing through as the members of the board see
all the way through
in the 80s. And there we go up to 95. Here I'll get some photos of the property itself. So this
is this block on Pemberton. This is the house in question. You'll see there's a garage and a
mansard style roof. Posted zoning signs on the front of the property. This is the interior of
the structure that was built by my client when he didn't realize that permits were necessary.
So construction was essentially stopped and they were waiting to complete construction until we have that approval from this board.
More or less, members of the board in the side to rear yard of the structure of the house itself, my client essentially wanted to create a sunroom, more or less, a covered deck of sorts.
So we have skylights in the top.
We have some windows around the side.
Some of those are going to be covered up based on the agreement that we had with the next door neighbor for privacy concerns.
This is another shot of the interior of the structure.
This is the exterior of the structure, as you can see.
It is constructed along the party wall
with the next door neighboring property,
but we do have an agreement with them
for our continued maintenance of that party wall.
And this is just shots from the street itself,
another shot of the property from the outside.
And what I have here, members of the board,
is a copy of the plan. This was the previous plan. The only difference between the revised plan that
I did submit with the proviso sheet earlier is that windows on this side which are to this side
of the neighbor's property are going to be closed up. So essentially all it is is a sunroom that
encompasses the open alleyway space that's in my client's property.
here's what we're looking at in terms of the actual structure itself the enclosure over the
existing rear deck in the rear yard of my client's property so the deck's already there they just
wish to enclose it this is the rear yard of the adjacent property this is the window that we'll
be closing off per the agreement with our neighbors as even though QVNA did offer a letter of
opposition members of the board. I just have this to suggest. QV&A, ultimately, it's their board that
makes a decision, as far as I'm aware, rather than taking a vote of the neighbors who are
present at the meeting. Considering the fact that we do have overwhelming support letters from the
neighbors and that the chair, pardon me, that Councilman Squilla has also offered a letter of
non-opposition in in fact letting the board make their decision uh we asked that you would support
this project we're not going to be interfering with light air safety of any of the next door
neighboring properties and this is essentially a sunroom more or less members of the board that
my client thought he was allowed to build by right and then realized after the fact that he wasn't
and then he immediately went to rectify this circumstance by coming to this zoning board
and seeking to have it legalized and he stopped work on the project in the meantime
All the while staying in touch with the immediately affected neighbor next door, presented this project to the community, and then specifically went around to receive as many letters of support as he can, which you could all see they were numerous in number.
I'm happy to answer any questions at this time. I believe my client was on the line, so I would like him to ask him to raise his hand so he can be unmuted.
what's the name of your client please rahul ganeshan okay
hello rahul are you there hi could you state your name and spell it for the court reporter
yes um my name is rahul ganeshan it's spelled r-a-h-u-l last name spelled g-a-n-e-s-a-n
All right. Do you swear for him to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Proceed.
Thank you. Rahul, you've heard my testimony today before the members of the zoning board?
Specifically with regard to the fact that you, unfortunately, believe that you could do this by right, correct?
Correct.
And then once you realize you couldn't, you immediately sought to have this legalized, correct?
Correct.
And you've been in constant contact with the immediate next-door neighbor, up to and including this morning.
is that fair to say correct not just the next door neighbor but every neighbor that's um
directly directly next to it as well or adjacent to it which we have support from as well
directly directly next to it as well or adjacent to it which we have support from as well yep so
we do have support letters from every adjacent neighbor to this proposed structure that's correct
do you have to say yes or no just for purposes of the record yes yes okay because we are being
taken down by a court reporter um yes otherwise have you heard my testimony and it's true and
accurate to the best of your knowledge and belief yes or you adopt my testimony as your own i do
Thank you. I'm happy to take any questions at this time.
Questions from the board?
No, Mr. Chairman.
No, Mr. Chairman.
Questions from the virtual audience?
Chair, we have Amy Rivera.
Good morning.
Hi, could you state your name and spell for the court reporter, please?
Yes, my name is Amy Rivera, A-M-Y-R-I-V.
E-R-A.
Do you swear for them to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Proceed.
I am a member of the Queen Village Neighbors Association Zoning Committee.
I've been on the committee for over 15 years.
The project was presented to the committee.
The committee unanimously opposed it because we feel it's an egregious take on 100% lot coverage for no hardship.
There was no hardship presented.
um the drawings that were presented to the queen village neighbors association zoning committee
were not what was built those drawings are different than what is built i have actual
pictures of the deck um they began construction without a permit the the applicant has done this
before he has an entire rooftop deck that was built without a permit and i have photos of that
the construction impinges on three property lines and presents a fire hazard to those three
property lines this is not a good precedent to set to allow homeowners to take 100%
law coverage for with no hardship present um that that's all i have would you like for me
pardon me
mr melville do you want to respond uh yes members of the board specifically with the regard to the
allegation of roof deck there's no evidence of record to submit or substantiate any of that
my client does have a roof deck on the property but it has been essentially looked at by lni no
violations have been issued for it to my understanding it is a legal roof deck under the
code with respect to this property itself i understand there is concern we've spoken
and have the support of all the adjacent neighbors whose properties face this project in addition we
have many, many other letters of support. So while I understand QVNA is concerned with respect to
this, ultimately community support substantially outweighs the vote of the QVNA zoning committee
itself. And the harms that have been raised potentially by Ms. Rivera are all fully speculative
at this point. And just regarding the purpose, regarding the drawing is not reflecting what
actually is built. What I'm showing you right now, members of the board, is page 103 of my
presentation packet, which shows the property. And what I'm showing you now, members of the
board, is page 110 of the presentation packet. And that's, if you look to the bottom left of
the screen where I'm now circling with my cursor, that's what we built, which is essentially the
same. And we're seeking to just have that all legalized as well. As I said, this window is
going to be closed off. We won't be dealing with any privacy issues with the immediate next door
neighbor. And like I said, the other members, neighbors who are nearby, both behind and
touching adjacent to this property on all sides, have issued their letters of support. So again,
I would just suggest that QDNA is concerned, is speculative at best, and we have support from
the neighbors, especially those immediately adjacent with regard to this project.
And there are any other comments from the virtual audience.
Here we have Kelly Joyce.
Hi, my name is Kelly Joyce.
Could you spell your name for the corporate reporter, please?
My first name is K-E-L-L-Y.
My last name is J-O-Y-C-E.
Right.
Do you swear a firm to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
yes i do thank you proceed so i own 321 pemberton and my backyard opens up into the adjacent space
occupied by 335 pemberton i admire um mr mobile's tactic of letters of support but
I admire Mr. Mobile's tactic of letters of support, but zoning is not about letters of support. It's about continuity. It's about the future. And there are also letters of opposition included in the packet that council person Squill has submitted. So I encourage people to look at it. There are a letter from opposition from somebody else who opens up into the back.
um my concerns are similar to amy rivera's it's a full lot coverage um it really changes the
character of kane village i'm also concerned that there's not an egress in the back um how are they
going to get out if there's a fire um my other my other point is that multiple neighbors called
license and inspectioning over the summer about this ellen i tried to visit 335 pemberton they
were not allowed in i did allow l and i into my house because my background objection lack of
foundation okay i understand where you are leo but let her proceed certainly so i let the um at
the request of neighbors i let the license and inspection uh person in so that he could photograph
the addition so you know i just want to challenge the narrative that mr mulville said that this was
just an honest mistake. They were willing to change once they found out because the experience
on the block was quite different. Thank you very much. Anybody else in the virtual audience?
Chair, we have Carol, excuse me, Carolyn Lowe. Okay. Good morning. Hi, could you state your
name and spell for the court reporter, please? Yes, my name is Carolyn, C-A-R-O-L-Y-M, Lowe,
l-o-w-e um i live at go ahead i live at 327 pemberton street uh i live two doors down
all right can you swear a firm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth
i do proceed um i live two doors down uh from uh 335 i live in between a 321 who just testified
and 335. I was one of the neighbors that agreed that the outside structure that has now
been built does not block any air or light from my backyard or my house or the one next door
to 335. We have a very lovely neighborhood, and I understand the need for the Queens Village
Association and other neighbors to concern. We don't want to disrupt the continuity in the
neighborhood. However, 321 is not adjacent to any of the adjacent. It is several doors down,
And we do have, as I've heard from the testimony, letters from various neighbors who are adjacent in support, as well as the neighbor who is directly adjacent.
So I would hope that there is some flexibility in zoning as we live in a very, very tight community here.
And because of COVID, everyone has had to live indoors for extended periods.
So anything that we can do to support our neighbors during this process, I am in support of.
And that's my testimony.
Thank you. Any other questions or comments from the virtual audience?
I see no hands, Chair.
Planning Commission.
Thank you, Chair Bergman. Ian Hegarty for the Philadelphia City Planning Commission.
members of the board in 2016 the zoning map was amended in this area in accord with
recommendations from the comprehensive plan but this partial was intentionally left it's rm1
um i just want to note that rear yard requirements are a fairly basic element of residential zoning
for the sake of fire safety adequate provision of light and air the rm1 zoning district requires at
least a seven-foot rear yard, whereas the enclosed structure provides no rear yard. If every property
on the block were to take the same tack, there would be no light and air on the first floors of
any of these properties. There are no unique conditions of this lot that require the building
to extend to cover the entire rear yard, and so the City Planning Commission recommends that the
board deny this variance. MI 2021-003-666-335 Pemmerin Street. I vote no.