I'm just waiting for the attendees to enter to the room it's time on yes Mr. Chairman thank you
Chair, we have 52 attendees. You can proceed as you wish.
Thank you.
Good morning, everyone. My name is Bill Bergman, and I will be chairing this morning's EBA hearings.
With me is our board member, Thomas Holliman.
Present, Mr. Chairman.
Our board member, James Snell.
Present, Mr. Chairman.
Also, LeBaron Leonard Palmer from the Division of Development Services will be serving as our alternate board member this morning.
Good morning, Mr. Chairman.
And also here is our attorney, Hillary Emerson, and our executive director, Tanya Sunkett.
Here's our virtual format.
Be advised the proceedings are being recorded.
The video will be available by contacting tanyasunkett at phila.gov.
For the benefit of our court stenographer, we ask attorneys and witnesses to identify themselves before testifying.
If you are participating by phone and you wish to testify, press star 9 to raise your hand and star 6 to unmute.
To enter the appearance statement, call 267-270-5548.
Leave your email address and also the address of the property in question.
And finally, the question answer box on the screen is not for comments or testimony.
All comments should be directed to our Executive Director, Tanya Sunke.
Let's look at our schedule for today.
Number four, MI 2023-006-463-2528-30 South 69th Street. That case is continued.
Number seven, MI 2023-006-466-422 Fountain Street.
That case is continued.
Number nine, MI 2023-006-519-20 South Ruby Street.
David Orphanides is the attorney. I believe he's requesting it continues. Mr. Orphanides.
Good morning, Chair. This is Nadia, and I'll be your co-host today.
Nadia, you can unmute Andrea Solomon. She is from Mr. Orphanides' firm.
Okay. They have been unmuted and allowed to speak.
Good morning. Hi, good morning. Hi, good morning. Could you please state your name and spell for
the court stenographer? My name is Andrea Solomon, A-N-D-R-E-A-S-A-L-O-M-O-N. Do you swear for him
to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? I do. Wait, case number MI 2023-006-519-20
South Ruby Street. I understand Mr. Orphanidis may want a continuance. Is that correct? That's
correct, Mr. Chairman. We've spoken to the community organization and are going to be
incorporating some revisions based on their recommendations. Thank you very much for your
call. So MI 2023-006-519-20 South Ruby Street, that case is continued. Number 11,
M.I. 2023-006-537-4423 St. David Street. That case is continued.
Let's see.
number 15 mi 2023 006 568 216 south 52nd street roger perry is the attorney also is the rco present
good morning chair um there are three hands raised we have a danielo burgos with their hands
so why don't we do this first why don't we bring mr perry he's there yeah i'm here if uh
good morning mr perry hold on a minute and then bring one person whoever's the head of the rco or
wants to speak for the RSO, could you bring them on?
I believe, so the person who raised their hand, that may be from the RCO, is Saba Tedla.
I believe, so the person who raised their hand, that maybe.
So I could be wrong, but that individual raised their hand when we asked for the RCO.
That's the wrong one.
Oh, it's the wrong one?
Okay, who's the name?
We can barely hear you, Mr. Perry.
Oh, I'm sorry.
Saba's on another case.
Oh, okay.
All right. Mr. Perry, state your name, please, and spell for the court.
Thank you. Roger Perry, P-E-R-R-Y. I'm an attorney on the station for 216 South 52nd Street.
All right. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Do we have an RCO member available?
Yeah, we have Zoom user with the hand raised. I'll allow you to speak.
okay sure hi i could you please state your name and spell for the court sonographer
please unmute yourself zoom user
it seems they may be having technical difficulties
Okay. Mr. Perry, we had information that the RCO would be requesting a continuance. Are you aware
of that? Yes, we've heard that, and we have had two meetings, so we would just ask that the
administration try to arrange a short continuance if possible. Okay. Mr. Chair, I see Mr. Goodman
had his hand raised. Okay. I was just about to say that, Hillary. Thank you.
Yeah. Morning, Mr. Goodman. Morning, Mr. Chair. Could you state your name, please, and spell for
the court's sonata? Absolutely. Andrew Goodman, A-N-D-R-E-W-G-O-O-D-M-A-N, here representing
the office of Third District Council Member Jamie Gaudier, room 316 City Hall. Do you swear or
affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? Yes, I do. Mr. Goodman,
And we understand there's a request for a continuance. Is that correct from the RCO?
Yes. So I can attest I have heard from the coordinating RCO directly as well as received their letter.
I think it's, yeah, there is a kind of requested revision.
So I think all parties are going to work actively and collaboratively.
So a short continuance would be much appreciated.
Thank you. Mr. Perry, you understand that, right? Am I correct? Are you okay with that?
Just that we would ask for, because it's a vacant store waiting to open,
And maybe if we could get it within 30 days, that would be appreciated.
Well, what we'll do is I'll have the office check with the office and we'll see what we can do with that.
So MI 2023-006-568-216 South 52nd Street.
That case is continued.
Hi, Chair.
This is Tanya.
I just wanted to put on the record that that will not be possible, but we'll try to get it as early as we can.
That's why I said for him to check with the office.
Thank you very much. Number 17, MI 2023, 006-613-5033 Duffield Street. That case is continued.
And number 21, MI 2024, 001-89-1515 Westmoreland Street. That case has been continued.
Are there any other, are there any comments relative to the cases that have been called?
Are there any other requests for continuance?
Yes, Chair, we have two hands.
Captain Blunt has been allowed to speak.
Yes, hello.
Hi, good morning.
Could you please state your name and spell for the court stenographer?
Catherine, C-A-T-H-E-R-I-N-E.
Blunt, B-L-U-N-T.
Right.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
What case do you want to talk about?
Well, I want to talk about case MI-2023-006464, ZP-23.
What's the location of that?
451 South 48th Street.
Mm-hmm.
Go on ma'am. Okay, so I requested, I sent a letter requesting a continuance because the ZBA RCO process was circumvented. The description of the work or the project was not transparent.
Are you from the 46th Ward RCO? Yes, I am. It was not transparent and that came out.
It was not transparent, and that came out during the February 15th meeting, and we requested that there be a second meeting.
All right.
Let me see.
Is Jonas McCunkus or Victoria Harris on the line?
Yes, Jonas has been allowed to speak.
Good morning.
Could you please state your name?
it's spelled for the court stenographer. Good morning, Mr. Chair. My name is Jonas Matsunas,
spelled J-O-N-A-S, M as Michael, A-C-I-U, N as Nancy, A-S. Right. Do you swear or affirm to tell
the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? I do. So there was an RCO member was on
requesting a continuance. Yes. Are you aware of this issue? I am aware of the issue. Okay. And
you're okay with a continuance? No, we object to the request. We sent a letter to the ZBA board
counsel objecting to it and illustrating several points at which the 46th Ward has written untruths
about the way that we proceed. So here's what we're going to do. We're going to hear that case
first, and I'm still going to go through, so I will call you back, and the RCO will have a chance
It's a test-fied hearing.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Mr. Chair, I just want to note for the record, I don't recall seeing the continuance request or the response in this matter from the RCO and the applicant.
So that's why this one was not marked for a request for continuance.
Very good.
Thank you.
I can't find it.
Thank you.
Are there any other requests for continuance?
Vern Anastasio has been allowed to speak.
Good morning, counsel.
could you please state your name and spell for the court stenographer good morning chair verne
anastasio a-n-a-s-t-a-s-i-o you swear a firm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but
the truth i do sir are you here for 303 brown street yes sir and uh i understand you want to
withdraw that am i correct yes please okay all right so mi 2022 003 288 303 brown street number
c this case has been withdrawn thank you sir thank you all right we're going to go now to
number two mi 2023 000 990 8129 germantown avenue michael bowman is the attorney
we have no exhibits for this this is the third listing
michael bowman if you're an audience please raise your hand
i see no hands chair okay so mi 2023 000 990 81 19 81 29 germantown avenue we have no exhibits
this is the third third listing no one's in the audience i vote to dismiss
Thomas Holloman, my vote is to dismiss
James Snell, my vote is to dismiss
And number 16
MI 2023-006-599-1150 Stevens Road
Isaac Slepner is the attorney for the owners
This is the first listing, we do not have any exhibits
Mr. Slepner or also Gregory or Karen Olenski?
Yes, good morning, Chair.
Isaac Slepner here for the applicants.
I sent those on Friday.
Hold on, do me a favor.
State your name and then spell for the court stenographer.
Yes, my name is Isaac, I-S-A-A-C, last name Slepner, S-L-E-P-N-E-R.
Do you swear or affirm, tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Mr. Slepner, we at this point, we don't see exhibits for you.
You don't have any exhibits because I sent them on Friday the 5th.
I sent to RCO's EBA and RCO notification.
Hillary, do we have anything?
I don't have anything.
So they weren't sent to board council.
So that's why I didn't see them.
And I don't know.
I believe this was this case was also on the staff's list of no exhibits.
So, I mean, they can double check and make sure, but they may not have received them either.
We're here and ready to proceed.
Hillary, the staff has them.
They're sending them to you now.
Let's put this one at the end, then I will review them.
Slepner, we'll go through the we'll have the documents.
We'll hear this one.
It's towards the end.
So what on the one o'clock list?
So what on the one o'clock list? Oh, no, no, no, no, the morning list. Oh, OK, great. No, no, no, no, the morning list. All right. I'm here. All right. Thank you. And number number 20.
Oh, no, no, no, no.
The morning list.
Oh, okay.
MI 2024-001-185-616-North 11th Street, no exhibits, first listing.
Brooke Diggs is the listed applicant.
Prosperous Investments 66 LLC is the listed owner.
Brooke Diggs if you're in the audience please raise your virtual hand
Chair we have Alex Udovich with their hands raised they have been allowed to speak
I apologize I should have lowered my hand I was going to testify on 1150 Stevens
so I'll wait for that case to come up again thank you thank you
brook digs or prosperous investments i see no hands thank you so mi 2024 001 185 616 north
11th street uh we have no exhibits this case is continued but will be marked must be heard thank
Thank you.
We're going to go to our add-on list.
MI 2023-005-139-626-30, North Delaware Avenue.
Appeal is granted with proviso.
This appeal is granted on the basis of vested rights only.
Zoning Permit 873511 is extended to 12-31-24.
Thomas Holloman, my bill is to appeal granted.
James Snell, appeal granted.
Thank you.
Number five.
Excuse me, board members, can you indicate if you're voting with the proviso as well?
Tom and Jim.
Sorry about that, Hillary.
Hillary, to include the proviso, appeal granted to include the proviso.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Number five, MI 2023-006-464-51451 South 48th Street.
Jonas McKendricus and Victoria Harris are the applicants.
This application is for the erection of a rear addition and stair from the rear yard to the first floor as part of an existing attached structure for use as a single family household living.
Whereas a minimum rear yard depth of nine foot is required.
The RC, the RSA five zoning district three foot is proposed.
We do not have a letter yet from the RCO.
The applicant has provided 13 letters of support from neighbors,
including the two adjacent neighbors.
ZBA has also received several letters from neighbors.
Mr. Jonas.
Good morning.
Good morning. Could you just state your name for the record? You've already been sworn.
All right. Jonas Mazunas.
Okay. And Mr. Holloman has just a few questions for you, sir.
Good afternoon, 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
yes thank you please proceed and show your screen all right
mr chair did you repeat the refusal into the record for this matter
what i did you did okay thank you sorry too many things going on
right can everybody see that we can great uh this is our list of exhibits that was uh that was
received um uh we have all the um you know tax compliance and deeds and that kind of thing at
the end if anyone wants to view them we can but we'll we'll stick to the condition conditions
uh plans uh and a setback diagram we've created
here's a refusal
my understanding you have one refusal for the distance in the backyard am I correct
that's right the it's for the distance in the rear yard yep yep yes
that's right the the it's for the distance in the rear yard yep yeah yes okay go ahead proceed
and then so just for context this is the front of the home you know the project is on on the back
in the garden court neighborhood this is what our block looks like with our our parcel highlighted
there's a set of alleys in the rear uh in an h shape that's that's ours uh you can see that
the parcel extends into the middle of the alley it's a it's one of these um easement alleys
uh that's the central alley in the block just for for context uh we've got a variety of decks
of different amounts of setback uh including some that are that are fairly close the east side uh
alley which ours is on the west side um is a 15 foot even just like uh just like ours uh with the
setbacks pulled you know right to it uh this is the other end of our segment of the alley we have
neighbor who um who actually you know the house exists before zoning existed so it encroaches on
the alley is you know um that's that uh and then this is our uh our our property uh you see it
labeled 451 on on the side um uh we've got the 15-foot alley uh with the neighbor across the way
um elevation looking at um looking at the home uh with our existing uh metal porch that was put on
according to my neighbor in 1960 or so uh that's the interior which is really why we're seeking to
do what we're doing uh we want to create more space for for our family there's you know the
two of us and uh two and a half kids right now um one is five months old um and we're looking to
screen it in so we can be out there during the buggy season have a little more space to be able
to have you know friends and family over um and have a space that you can walk on without without
shoes right now it's that diamond plate steel uh this is the uh material that was submitted to lni
with all the different drawings um i pulled up a couple of those for more detail so we can take
closer look uh elevations from the rear and from the side uh the porch will become actually a little
bit narrower than it is presently. And then it'll be is proposed to be deeper than it
is than it is right now. But the idea is to do a fully a porch treatment, balusters on
the bottom, removable screens on on on all sides for ease of repair, removability, opening
it up during the non-buggy seasons um that that that sort of thing and then this is the first
floor first floor plan um again the first floor being elevated kind of above the alley garage level
uh so this comes in right off the existing kitchen we're not modifying the existing door or windows
at all um but that's what that that looks like and then uh this is the site plan uh that shows
the existing alley easement which is half ours and half are across the alley neighbors
and then we've mocked up a diagram that's at least for many of us can be a little bit easier
to understand showing up just a general massing of where the where the porch would stand the
yellow line indicates the property line in our submission we used the the alley as the as the
as the setback um but it's you know ultimately set back uh ten and a half feet from the actual
property line you know we can't obviously use the alley um you know for building construction like
that um but uh it provides it would it'll remain providing a light and air the the the zoning code
uh asked for and uh resulting again it's sort of 18 feet from uh our new porch to our neighbors um
to our neighbor's house uh as you mentioned we've got a number of letters uh the 13 that
that you mentioned and then there's two more that have come in since then we know
including uh 13 of our near neighbors um both party wall uh sharing neighbors and then we had
our community meeting back on february 15th um that was attended by uh uh four um of our of our
near neighbors, three of whom had questions, and we've spoken with all of them since then,
addressed those concerns, and they've all told me that they're comfortable with where we are now,
which we feel really good about because we started talking to them back, you know, last summer
when we were thinking about making the submission. So we're happy to answer questions.
Questions from the board. Let me ask you this. What happened when you went to the,
to explain the uh the results of the rcm when you went to the meeting there was three people
disagreed and you've talked to them since is that what you're saying well there were there there were
um uh there were four or five people who were you know of the near neighbors who were present
uh there were four or five people who were you know of the near neighbors who were present uh
i think one dropped off pretty early um one of them uh one of them was you know fully supported
from the beginning and three people had questions um it wasn't really objections but they had
questions that were raised um which you know we took to account because we know the one of them
is the is the house that's across the way and so we wanted to make sure we talked to her you know
personally afterwards um and you know we did we had done so a few times before and and we spoke
to her and her husband um out in the alley uh not long after the meeting um and and she felt
comfortable uh better understanding and we talked through it physically in person um and and has
told me that she's she's comfortable with it she would she didn't want to you know write a letter
for or against but uh she was she was happy with it all right all right questions from the board
no mr chairman no chair questions or comments from our attorney hillary emerson
um i just want to note that the the correspondence regarding the continuance
request was forwarded to me by um council regati's office so thank you okay um
questions or comments from the virtual audience we have captain blunt they have been allowed to speak
good morning you uh you were already sworn so just do me a favor just state your name for the
record and then please present your testimony catherine blunt c-a-t-h-e-r-i-n-e-b-l-u-n-t
we did send on our all of our information the summary along with the letter uh to uh the proper
addresses, email addresses, so I'm surprised that you did not get in. I'm sorry about that.
All right. So we requested a continuance mainly because it's not that we, the RCO,
is opposed to what Jonas, the applicant, his variance. It's the fact that the letter that
was sent out to the near neighbors announcing the meeting by the applicant talked about a
rear porch and did not go into a case that it would be a structure, an additional structure.
And so during the course of the meeting, we pulled up the notice of refusal. We read what
was said by that notice and people were confused. And we asked for more of the drawings that you've
seen tonight, today, that we didn't see. And so basically I requested that it be a second meeting
that I would work with the applicant to get the information out because I didn't want him to do
another mailing. And then he would then specify exactly what he was doing, show the drawings so
that people were clear, and so that the near neighbors have a better idea of what he was going
to do instead of something called a back, what we called it, a back porch. And so the applicant
refused. And basically, I then requested a short continuance to have that meeting so that he could
explain to all of the neighbors that share that kind of back alleyway so that they are clear that
this was going to be a structure, and it may obscure their vision, and whatever the case may
be. And as long as they went along with it, there was no problem for us. We just wanted the process
to be clear. We wanted there to be full transparency, and we wanted the neighbors to have
an opportunity to make a decision on something that they were clear about. That transparency
did not occur, and that kind of clarity did not occur either. That's the only reason why we
You requested reply to a specific accusation.
So what, what, hold on, let me, let's do this.
Let's make sure there's no one else has testimony just for a record.
We do have in our hands at least 13 letters from near neighbors.
I just want you to know that.
Is the RCO, is she still on the line?
yes there she is okay i just i just want you to know that we have enormous letters including
the people on either side and that's fine my okay all right what i would say that they understand
that there is like a rear addition to the house as long as you can that it's a rear addition that's
going to block their view then that's fine with me i just wanted to transfer process transparent
All right. Well, you know what? We appreciate your comments. Is there anyone else in the virtual audience who has a comment?
All right. Well, you know what? We appreciate your comment.
Leonard has been allowed to speak.
Good morning, Mr. Chair. My name is Leonard Clark. I'm the party wall neighbor at 449 South 48th Street.
Leonard, just for the record, could you spell your name for the court stenographer?
Yeah, it's B as in boy, O-N as in Nancy, A-R-E-K is my last name.
All right. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Please proceed, sir.
I'm sorry. It's happening after my affirmation. I'm the party wall neighbor to Jonas and Victoria. I've been their neighbor for about six years now.
yeah yep um i'm very familiar with the project uh and i've seen the plans and there is already
an existing roof um on their deck which is which is you know existing um i don't see that my view
is substantively changed in any way um so i i have absolutely no objection to the property
And I understand that there was some insinuation that people weren't informed or that they had been not properly informed of what the scope of the project is.
That is not my understanding at all between myself and the neighbors that I've spoken to.
They all understand what the project is.
I haven't spoken to anyone who lives on our block or near our block that is opposed to this project.
Thank you very much for taking the time to call us.
Is there anyone else in the virtual audience?
Catherine Blunt has their hand raised again.
Ms. Blunt?
The only thing I'm going to say is this.
These new neighbors who approve...
Ms. Blunt, go ahead, proceed.
Just state your name for the record again.
Catherine Blunt, B-O-U-N-T.
All right, go ahead, proceed.
So these new neighbors did not attend the meeting.
And that was my concern because we weren't unclear.
we weren't unclear about the project until we were in the meeting and people started asking
questions. So again, my only concern is as long as I understand, so this rear roof has nothing to,
this rear, this roof over a deck, a small deck has nothing to do with this at all. This is a
structure that is being put up. So the existing deck is being torn down. A new structure is being
put up affixed to the house and it's closed in on all sides and so neighbors need to understand
they need to know that that it's possible that once this structure comes up that it will set a
precedent that the near neighbors i wish they would i wish they would have attended the meeting
i wish all of these people who signed the letters attended the meeting but they show up all right
well thank well miss blunt we understand your position thank you all right anyone else in the
virtual audience i see no hands um sir do you want to make comments jonas um yeah i just there
was one specific um accusation that was levied that we didn't share the drawings um the drawings
were sent to the rco a couple days in advance of the meeting and we shared them during the meeting
um so that's it's just an unsubstantiated accusation it won't okay thank you um planning
Commission. Thank you, Chair Bergman, and good morning, David Fecteau, F-E-C-T-E-A-U, with the
City Planning Commission. Right. You swear or affirm that tell the truth, the whole truth,
nothing but the truth. Yes, sir, I do. Please proceed. Thank you, sir. Chairman and board
members, the comprehensive plan recommends no change to the residential single-family zoning
at this location. The proposed rear deck appears to be a common condition on this block face,
and it would not injure the use of adjacent properties.
The City Planning Commission recommends the board grant
a proposed dimensional variance for a non-conforming rear yard depth.
Thank you.
MI 2023-006-464-451 South 48th Street, I vote yes.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes.
James Snell, my vote is yes.
You have your vote, sir.
Thank you.
Okay. Number three, MI 2023-004-927-1347 Master Street. Joshua Horowitz is the attorney.
Excuse me, Mr. Chair. Can we go to number 14 next?
Well, certainly.
Thank you. And then we can go back to the top of the list.
MI 2023-006-567-1201 Fanshawe Street. Richard DeMarco is the attorney. Leonard Reuter is also.
Is the attorney, Leonard Reuter, is also involved in this, representing L&I or the city?
Richard DeMarco, Leonard Reuter, has been promoted to panelists.
Mr. DeMarco, could you state your name, please, and spell for the court sonographer?
certainly richard demarco last name spelled d-e-m-a-r-c-o right do you swear or affirm to
tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth i do uh mr reuter could you please spell
your name for the court stenographer sure leonard reuter l-e-o-n-a-r-d last name r-e-u-t-e-r
senior attorney for the city of philadelphia you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth
nothing but the truth? I do. Mr. DeMarco, I understand you have an appeal against L&I and
also a variance appeal. Am I correct? Well, I mean, I elected not to formally file an appeal
against L&I. We did go through the full process. We did meet with the neighbors. We have full
support from the neighborhood group, so I'm not sure. So, Hillary, we can go right to the variance.
Am I correct? Well, so let me just clarify, because in the application for appeal, it was
very clear that there were two grounds being pursued in this case. One, an argument that
the refusal should not have been issued. And secondly, in the alternative, that there would
be a variance granted. So if you are waiving the appeal against LNI, then we can move to the
variance case. Leonard, you wanted to say something? Yeah, sure. I could probably just
resolve the issue right off the bat. I think the appeal against LNI essentially is a vested
rights argument that this is a non-conforming
use. There had been a prior court opinion, a Commonwealth
court opinion addressing a previous application and
in that opinion, if I read it correctly, it cites
the zoning board's prior findings of fact and conclusions of law
and I believe it appears that the zoning board itself had previously
determined as a fact that this property
had been constructed as a two-family structure.
They didn't address whether it had been continuously used,
but it clearly is a two-family structure.
So as far as the appeal against L&I goes,
when it comes to vested rights or non-conforming use argument,
I just leave it up, we leave it up to the board
to determine if there's enough facts there.
So we're not really opposing their request.
But my understanding is that they have the support for a variant,
So obviously the city would have no objection, at least from a legal standpoint, about whichever way you want to go.
Yeah, I completely agree with what Len just said. That's exactly where we're at. I don't want to bother Len with this. I mean, I can't stipulate to the accuracy of the refusal, though. I do believe it was issued an error.
um so but but what he just said is exactly where we're at procedurally and you know this board
this property is it was a duplex always was was never discontinued but i'll do whatever hillary
wants wants me to do why don't we move right to the variance that's fine that's fine with all
parties we can go the variance will note for the record that there is an objection to the refusal
perfect perfect all right thank you thank you all right thanks mr demarco you've already been
sworn am i correct oh i'm not sure well i'll do it again do you swear or affirm to tell the truth
told truth nothing but the truth i do could you identify your client your relationship to the
property yeah the client is an llc chang fang construction the client is uh yan fang lin
who hopefully is in the Zoom and can will accept my testimony as her own at the end of my
presentation. And Mr. Hallman has just a few questions and we understand your objection.
Sure. Good afternoon. I mean, I'm sorry. Good morning, counsel. Do you agree to waive the
reading of the refusal and stipulate to his accuracy? Yeah, I can waive the reading. I can't
stipulate to the accuracy. Did you email all of the exhibits and documents as required five days
in advance to this hearing? Yes, I did. Thank you. Please proceed and share your screen.
Thank you. Yeah, Mr. Chairman, so hopefully on your screen, you should see that there was an
issue with the tax balance. Okay, good. That's been resolved. So I'll click off of that. She has
brought her taxes compliant as far as the real estate taxes. And I'll start with the exhibits.
so i'll put right on at i'll hit the main argument is so so you could understand why i i i framed the
understand why I framed the application of appeal as both a request for variance and
application of appeal as
an argument against the refusal. It's because the property was always a duplex,
was constructed as a duplex. This is the actual original plan back from the 1940s to develop the
entire area. And you can see, I'll zoom in so you can see it says two family there. This is the
property right here, Mr. Chairman. That says two families there. What happened was this board
granted a three... We had a contested matter a few years ago, and the original owner who sold
to this particular client that's before you today actually put units in the basement without a
permit. And after a process in front of this board, the board granted on a reconsideration
motion, granted three units, but that was overturned on appeal. So the new owner was
always expecting to be able to operate the original duplex and actually received rental
licenses for the two units from L&I. And what happened to her, I'll show you that in a moment.
Let me zoom back in. As you can see here, two units. She was issued a certificate of rental suitability. She was issued a rental license. Here it is here for two units. This Yang Feng Lin, that is Yang Feng Investments, my client. You see she got a rental license for two units.
But for some odd reason, during a process, and this is her floor plan, so the problem that really causes this is that the prior client walled off the garage, so she did receive a violation for not having the garage.
She will return it to that state, but she can't get a building permit to do that until the zoning is straightened out.
She got refused for the zoning because of the current RSA 5 zoning classification.
This is the floor plan. There's a unit on the first floor, a unit on the second floor, and that's it.
And they are occupied because, like I said, she was like I just showed you, she got rental licenses for the two units.
So they are legal, always have been, and have not been discontinued.
Just show you a quick bunch of photos.
This is the property here on the right.
I guess, you know, if I were, this is the property here.
As you can see, it's a double lot.
It's a large lot, well able to accommodate the duplexes as they were constructed back in the 40s.
Forgive me, my scanner's been on the fritz, but that's the posting.
so my computer's going a little slow here and this is the refusal as you can see there's no
notation for the prior case here they're usually the lni puts notices to the board here
it really should have said um there was a prior zoning board case where a triplex triplex was
granted and then it um where it should have revert that was overturned on appeal as i said
which we've stipulated to, I agree with Leonard's summary of it. The board actually in the prior
matter, and let me go to that real quick, and then I can wrap up. The board in the prior manner
actually found that it was a legal duplex to begin with. Now, here's the decision of the board back
in, here we go. This was the calendar number here, 36722. And you could see I was involved
With that case, the applicant went for four units and eventually got three.
It was initially denied, as you can say, but then there was a reconsideration, then three
units was given.
All right.
So the neighbors, we met with them.
They just wanted to go back to the duplex.
They're well aware that it was always a duplex.
They just want the violations to comply.
They want the garage put back, which my client intends to do, but can't get the building permit until we get the zoning.
And because of the issuance of the refusal, we have to go through the process.
I'll show you the neighborhood's letter.
It was very nice.
We had a nice meeting with some nice folks in that area.
They just, like I said, they want the violations complied.
They want the garage put back.
And that's fine.
The applicant agrees with that. Obviously, there's a clear hardship because even if you were to disagree that the property is a legal duplex, there's clearly a hardship because the three units was legal when it was granted by.
There's clearly a hardship because the three units was legal when it was granted by this board, and the two units prior to that were legal, and the zoning classification is now RSA-5.
It's a classic non-conforming use to convert the property to a single-family use to comply with the code would result in the evictions of the current tenants.
The property would have to be completely reworked, but we agreed with the neighbors, just storage in the basement and the garage and utilities.
And they were fine with that. So we had really an overwhelming vote, 22 to 1 in favor. So with that, I would ask Yang Lin to raise her hand virtually so she could accept my presentation as her testimony.
So, Yan, now's the time for you to click raise hand.
I see no hands.
Mr. DeMarco, you're an officer of the court
Your testimony is fine
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
We have a Zoom user with their hand raised
They have been allowed to speak
That's probably her
Good morning, could you please state your name and spell for the court stenographer
y-a-n f-e-n-g last name l-i-n do you swear or firm to tell the truth the whole truth
nothing but the truth yes i do uh lynn how are you thank you lynn uh did you hear
my statements that i just made to the zoning board yes do you agree that they are true and
accurate. And can you adopt them as your testimony today?
Yes. That's all, Mr. Chairman. Thank you. Thank you. Is there
anyone else in the virtual audience?
Their hand just went down. Madeline has been allowed to
speak.
All right. Could you please state your name and spell for the
court stenographer?
Madeline, please unmute yourself.
Oh, I'm not speaking on this one. I'm sorry.
Okay, thank you.
Planning Commission.
Thank you, Chair Bergman, and good morning, David Fecto.
With the City Planning Commission, Chairman and Board Members,
the comprehensive plan recommends no change to the residential single-family zoning at this location.
This property has a documented history as two dwelling units.
The City Planning Commission recommends the Board grant a proposed use variance for two dwelling units.
Thank you.
MI 2023-006-567-1201 Fanshawe Street, I vote yes, maximum two units.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes, with proviso.
James Snell, my vote is yes, with proviso.
Thank you, counsel.
Thank you. Have a good afternoon, everyone.
Thank you.
Number three, MI 2023-004-927-1347 Master Street.
Joshua Horvitz is the attorney.
Letter of support from South Kensington Community Partners.
Joshua is coming in as panelists.
Good morning, sir.
Could you please state your name and spell for the court stenographer?
Good morning.
I am Joshua Horvitz, J-O-S-H-U-A-H-O-R, V as in Victor, I-T-Z.
Right.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
Could you identify your client and relationship to this property?
My clients, Benjamin Eisenberg and Jacqueline DiPietro, husband and wife who are the owners
of the property, should be in attendance.
All right.
And Mr. Holloman has just a few questions for you, sir.
Good afternoon.
I'm sorry.
Good morning, counsel.
Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to his accuracy?
Did you email all the exhibits and documents as required five days in advance to this hearing?
I did.
Thank you.
Please proceed and share your screen.
Will do.
Good morning, Mr. Chairman, members of the board.
Again, I'm Josh Horvitz of Armstrong Teasdale.
On behalf of the applicants, the property owners, my clients,
Benjamin Eisenberg and Jacqueline DiPietro purchased this house from a developer who had rehabilitated the house.
There was an outstanding building permit issued by the city in 2021, which I will show you, for the work that they did subsequent to their closing on the house where there was an escrow because the permit hadn't been closed out yet.
where there was an escrow because the permit hadn't been closed out yet.
And subsequent to that, the developer walked away from the escrow and they learned that
the city permit was issued in error and that the city wouldn't agree to close out the building
permit. Now, the only refusal that was issued was for the third floor rear portion of the addition.
So there's a roof deck that was put on.
And then you can see on the elevation here, there was the house is already two stories
and they added a third story in the rear.
There was already a third story in the front.
And it's just the last seven feet in the rear that would be a setback only at the third
floor level that there was a refusal for.
We met with the community group.
There were five votes in favor and none against.
There are other properties, if you'll see, nearby that are taller.
So this one has a roof deck and it's three stories, but you can see off the side of the
roof deck, two houses down, there's a house that's even taller, that's four stories high.
And it was a nicely done renovation.
You know, they relied on their experts, their realtors, who told them that, you know, it's
just a matter of this permit getting closed out.
This is the pictures from the rear of the property.
Now, behind the property is a parking lot of a condominium, so they're not taking up anybody's light or air.
It's just a parking lot back there.
You can see from an overhead here that it's just a parking lot back there.
So I'll show you the building permit that was issued by the city, and this was on page 88 of my packet, and I'll just skip right ahead to that.
um so uh here's a printout of it and it says you know the plans are here and they were stamped
uh by the city as approved so this was for the construction of the um the addition and the
alterations and so the addition in the rear is what the permit that was issued is what ultimately
we're here for today so this was a building permit that was issued as if the zoning was
already approved for what we're here for today um but it was just issued by mistake and i'll just
you there was a stamp by the city on the plans here um uh you know these are the same uh plans
that we're ultimately going to bring back through uh hopefully after today um to get approved and
here's the plant the stamp at the top right of this page um so uh like i said uh and i'll show
you there there was a meeting and we did get a letter of support and um that letter should be
page 59 of my packet and that was from the south kensington community partners so there were people
that showed up and spoke and and they understood it says here the neighbors generally voiced support
um it was improperly permitted and already built it in place and they didn't discover the issue
until after um they purchased the property they're a nice young couple and you know they didn't
understand you know understand what was needed here but um we did put into our packet the actual
escrow agreement that they had with the builder where, you know, the builder doesn't make it seem
like it's just a matter of them getting the permits closed out. And so at the time that they
bought the property, here's the addendum, $30,000 held in escrow. And just for all the permits and
including the rooftop and approvals to be closed out and the settlement issued, you know, if it
wasn't by settlement. Now, the settlement went through and then ultimately here's the money
getting released from the escrow where the builder did not keep up with the agreement.
Seller agrees to release it so the buyers can do it on their own because they didn't
and weren't willing to do so.
And if you'll promote my clients, they'll be, I'm sure, willing to adopt.
Well, I'll ask them if they'll adopt my testimony.
And otherwise, we're happy to answer any questions.
Why don't we do that?
Why don't you bring one of your clients on?
I'm sorry, if you wouldn't mind promoting Benjamin Eisenberg.
Ben has been allowed to speak.
Good morning, sir. Could you please state your name and spell for the court stenographer?
Sure. Good morning. My name is Ben Eisenberg, B-E-N, last name Eisenberg, A-Y-Z-E-N-B-E-R-G.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Please proceed, counsel.
Ben, have you heard my testimony so far today?
and do you adopt my testimony as your own i do thank you all right question 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 see no hands planning commission thank
i see no hands planning commission thank you chairman and good morning david effecta with the
Thank you, Chairman.
city planning commission chairman and board members the comprehensive plan recommends no
change to the residential single family zoning at this location the appellant is requesting
dimensional variances for a rear yard setback this is an existing undersized lot with a rear
setback line comparable to others on the block face the city planning commission recommends
the zoning board grant, the dimensional variances. Thank you. MI 2023-004-927-1347
Master Street, I vote yes. Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes. James Snell, my vote is yes.
Counselor, you have your votes. Thank you. Thank you. Okay. Number six, MI 2023-006-465-2623
Anna Street. Lee Elsie is the attorney. There's a letter of support from residents organized for
advocacy and direction. Good morning, Mr. Elsie. Could you please state your name and spell for
the court stenographer? Good morning. Lee Elsie, L-E-E-E-L-S-E-Y. Do you swear or affirm to tell
the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? I do. Could you identify your client and
their relationship to this property? Yes, the property is owned by my clients, who are Mr.
Lionel Thomas and Mr. Kareem Welker. Okay, and Mr. Thomas, our board member, Mr. Holloman,
has a few questions for you. Good morning, counsel. Do you agree to weigh the reading
of the refusal and stipulate to his accuracy i do did you email all the exhibits and documents
as required five days in advance to this hearing i did thank you please proceed and share your screen
okay good morning mr chair and members of the board um i believe my screen should be visible
i'm acting today both as attorney and architect so i'm able to speak um in regards to both
matters. We're at 2623 and 2625 Annan Street. The proposal for this project is
both the consolidation of these two lots as well as new construction for a
four-story multi-family building. Now the refusal, let me jump right to the
refusal here. To be clear, there was an original refusal and it's since been revised. We have
refusals both for the number of multifamily units in a multifamily unit zone. We're requesting
four units. Two are allowed by right. And we're also seeking a dimensional variance for the
required minimum rear yard depth. Seven feet is required in the lot. We're seeking five and a half
inches, but that is something we can clarify, I believe, and sort of alleviate some of the concerns
of how that sounds. Now, here is a rendering of the proposed new construction. It looks like it's
kind of more suburban due to the fact that you don't see much around it but that results from
the fact that with this building being demolished which is the 2625 site we essentially have
parking lots and vacant lots extending in both directions I do believe there is some new
construction over in this area we can clarify later if desired and just just
to situate us we're on Annan Street which is a relatively narrower street
but still allows for both parking and traffic and we're located between 26th
and 27th
here are pictures of the existing site prior to the demolition this is 2625
It was an existing two-story single-family structure, which was purchased, both lots, essentially this driveway lot, which there's a car parked on it, but it belongs to the owners along with this existing building.
It was purchased in 2022 and was determined unsafe and demolished.
It was purchased in 2022 and was determined unsafe and demolished early in 2023.
Here's an existing picture of the rear yard.
And just to clarify, the existing setback from this bay is four foot six and a half inches.
Well, I just wanted to address that while we're looking at this picture, and I will return to it later.
There also exists a pass-through easement that runs on the lot line
that separates the two properties that we are consolidating.
Here are some views along Annan Street. You can see the other new properties being built primarily
multi-family in nature. Here's an update of the site as of October when 2625 Annan Street was
demolished. You can see sort of the character of buildings behind it. The
property to the left fronts on Ellsworth Street and continues all the way through
with the rear parking area as does the property to the right. Here's an updated
picture after we had a meeting with community. They addressed some concerns
about protecting the near neighbor's property and addressing some of the fill
that was left on the site, which my clients were happy to provide. Here are
pictures of the zoning posters. These are dated March 15th.
here is a deed. Now, I'll take you real quick to the zoning drawings and zoom in a little bit to
see what we're proposing. Now, the original zoning drawing, we sought to eliminate the
pass-through alley that ran between the two buildings as my clients now own both sides
of the lot. Relatively late in the process, working with the survey district, we were notified that we
were unable to eliminate this easement because it's actually deeded so that it benefits the
properties that face on Ellsworth Street. In the past, there might have been some ways to
extinguish that, but LNI is not open to removing rear yard egress easements, which we
understand and we had revised our zoning plan to reroute that easement through the exit through
the proposed rear yard and then along the 26 23 and in street property line now this is something
that is still being revised with the survey district and we will request that proviso be
added that our approval is contingent upon that being approved but we expect it to be approved
it's just a matter of of going through that process now this this easement and the fact
that we need to retain this easement is is also results in the reason why our rear yard setback
is so small the actual building line is seven foot five and a half inches from that rear property
line there is a balcony proposed at second third and fourth story here to provide outdoor living
space for the for the the unit occupants which reduces it to three and a half sorry three foot
five and a half feet and then with that three foot easement it further reduces the technical
easement to five and a half inches. But with us not fencing this off and leaving it for these
owners to just sort of traverse through the yard as they would have originally as it existed in
its current state, we believe the actual five, I'm sorry, seven foot, five and a half inch
setback is what we're realistically dealing with. And the four foot setback
to this front is what we'll be dealing with the actual building application.
Here's the previously proposed zoning plan before we amended it,
which did not show that the easement wrapping around the property and did not include that updated rear yard line.
Let me take you through the building plans real quick.
We're seeking one unit per floor with an accessible type B unit on the ground floor.
Each of the units is two bedrooms and one bathroom.
two bedrooms and one bathroom. They're all nearly identical. Each one is around between 700 and
They're all nearly identical.
800 square feet, which the only difference being the need to pass through this easement on the
first floor. And each unit has a balcony area to provide living space in the exterior, as well as
the top unit has access to a roof deck balcony so the total lot area is over a
thousand square feet and the gross building is three thousand four hundred
and thirty square feet here are proposed renderings of the building including a
front facade trash storage for use by the tenants the egress pass-through and
and the balconies located along the rear.
Now, on February 7th, we met with the community,
which included a conglomeration of several different RCOs.
The primary organizing one was the road RCO.
We had had a preliminary meeting a week or two before just with the RCO.
representatives and we sought to sort of approach them in order to explain our situation and why we
were seeking these additional units and to give them sort of some of our considerations as we
dealt with this. One of the main things that they were concerned about is, you know, with these
additional units, how can we address some of the concerns that the community has? And one of the
primary concerns the community has is the need for affordable units for low-income families.
Now, we discussed two options at that point. We discussed altering our proposal to include the
mixed income bonus, which is available for this site, although buy right would only allow in three
units, and only one of those units would have to be affordable at a 50% AMI rate. Alternatively,
we we argued for our approach which is four units that all are open to um as living as housing
assistance including uh vouchers and that was the approach that met with the most favor from the
community and when we when we dealt with the the larger community we were able to get um five yes
votes, zero no votes, and one vote that abstained. Now, as part of our argument, you know, we've
been in touch with Councilperson Johnson's office. I'm not sure if a letter of support came through.
We were having a difficult time reaching them over the last few weeks, but we have dealt with
them on other projects, and we're seeking to work with Ms. Lynn Wilkins at Laborers and Housing,
and provides assistance within that district to facilitate projects like this.
Now, the owners are seeking to become part of the minority developer program
that works with PHDC to provide affordable housing projects.
This is a neighborhood in which the PHDC is active.
As an architect, I'm working with other clients in that same program
to provide additional affordable housing in this neighborhood.
It's a real priority.
The owners of this property own another property close by on the 1500 block of Ringgold
in which they currently accept housing assistance.
And that is something that they've committed to doing this property as well.
Here is the mailing that went out with the meeting date.
went out on January 18th for that February meeting.
Here is the firm book for the certified mailing.
A preliminary letter went out because we were not able to have a meeting date
within the 20-day timeline, so we provided that mailing as well.
We do have some zoning precedents.
There are some properties on the other side of Annan Street that take a similar approach.
I know these are pretty much impossible to read from the zoning archive at this point but
these received variances for multi-family these are four unit buildings on the other side of the
street which we believe are similar in character and we just with the community and then on the
And then on the other side of Federal Street, we've also got 2609 Federal and 2605 Federal.
other side of Federal Street we've also got 2609
Those are CMX, but they have received variances for multifamily housing, which we believe are similar to this variance.
We've got our appeal. We've got our project information, tax clearances for both properties.
And at this time, I would ask for Mr. Walker and Mr. Thomas to be admitted to adopt my testimony.
Hi, could you please state your name and spell for the court sonography?
lionel thomas l-i-o-n-e-l t-h-o-m-a-s right do you swear or affirm to tell the truth the
whole truth nothing but the truth yes i do please proceed counsel
thank you good morning mr thomas do you do you adopt my testimony including my representations
and the documents provided?
Yes, I do.
Do you and your partner own other rental properties
that accept financial assistance,
including financial vouchers?
Yes, three in total right now,
and I'm well on the way.
Thank you.
Questions or comments from the board?
No, Mr. Chairman.
No, Chair.
Questions or comments from our attorney,
Hillary Emerson?
just briefly mr chair um mr lz you had mentioned and um we were going through the plans
that you were requesting a proviso contingent on approval for the was it the easement you said
yep moving the easement
yes i have as part of the exhibit the the original proposed so as part of the consolidation
We approved a survey district consolidation plan, but unfortunately, and kind of a little bit of a miscommunication with us and the surveyor, they kind of went ahead and just sort of left that easement in, which makes the building almost, one of our hardships working around that easement was nearly impossible for a sort of a combined building on this one.
So we are seeking to amend this approval with the easement running across the back and along the side, which resulted in that dimension for the rear yard setback.
Okay, so I thought because there was an amended refusal here, I thought the movement of the easement was part of the amended refusal.
so it is um and i let me know whether or not this proviso is is necessary or not um l and i is not
going to issue this permit until they have this updated plan i'm not aware of anything that would
stop the survey district from approving the updated plan as proposed but we don't have it
in hand yet it's just it you know it's a long process with them okay that that is fine but
did issue they did issue an amended refusal based on an updated site plan with the updated easement
right exactly yes okay that's fine i think yeah i don't think we need to if i'm not
extensive as a requirement by l and i and it's one that hasn't been communicated to us um i think we
are fine if the board decides to approve this to just include a proviso for the amended refusal and
And then if L&I requires additional documentation prior to the permit being issued, they will let you know that.
That's acceptable. Thank you.
Thank you. Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
Good morning, Mr. Chair. This is Jason and I'm stepping in temporarily. I do not see any.
Thank you. Planning Commission.
Thank you, Chairman. And good morning, David Vecto with the City Planning Commission.
Chairman and board members, the comprehensive plan recommends a change in zoning in this location from residential multifamily to residential single family.
There is no unique physical condition of this property that would prevent it from being used in conformance with the zoning code.
The City Planning Commission recommends the board deny the proposed use variance for four dwelling units and the proposed dimensional variance for rear yard depth.
and a note to the appellant any change to the approved survey plan will require city planning
commission review and stamp
council you have any comments
Council, do you have any comments at this time?
MI 2023-006-465-2623, Annan Street, I vote yes with proviso per amended refusal dated 2-29-24.
Hillary, do we make part of the proviso that they'd have to go back to planning?
David, is that something that would automatically be triggered with them going back to get a permit issued?
That's correct.
You don't need to proviso that.
Thank you so much.
Sorry.
So the proviso is per amended refusal dated 2-29-24.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes with proviso.
James Snell, my vote is yes with proviso.
Thank you, counsel.
thank you number eight number eight mi 2023 006 506 49 10 longshore avenue alan knockamson is the
attorney there's a letter of non-opposition from taconi civic association
they will be rejoining as a panel shortly sir
Good morning, Mr. Monocomson.
Would you please state your name and spell it for the court stenographer?
Yes, Alan, A-L-A-N, last name, Monocomson, N-O-C-H-U-M-S-O-N.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Could you identify your client, a relationship to this property?
Yes, my client is Rosa Realty LLC, and in the virtual audience is its member, Danielio Burgos.
Okay, and our Mr. Holloman has a few questions for you.
Good morning, counsel.
Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to his accuracy?
I actually object to the accuracy of the refusal in this respect.
This is an application for visitor accommodations.
So my understanding is how the board previously has presented or handled these matters is that there is no unit count for visitor accommodations.
And the refusal says visitor accommodations and existing multifamily for dwelling units.
So, first, we object in that it should not state how many dwelling units there are with respect to a visitor accommodation application.
And irrespective, there should be five dwelling units on the application if there is a reference to that.
Okay. Did you email all the exhibits and documents as required five days in advance to this hearing?
Yes, we did.
Thank you. Please proceed.
and show your screen all right so this is a very straightforward application uh this is 49
10 long short short avenue we're in the tuconi section of philadelphia uh we're on a rather
large lot of almost 12 000 square feet it is an rsa3 property uh but that you'll see in the
presentation that we have properties that are zoned CMX2 adjacent to us, and we're also on a
commercial border, and we have off-street parking. And we're looking to have visitor accommodations
for five units for this property. So during our presentation, we'll review the notice of refusal.
We have a letter of non-opposition from the Tocconi Civic Association. Just as a side note,
my client's well-known in this area. They work well with the community as well as the other
organizations within the community. So, they're a well-known quantity here in this neighborhood.
But having Airbnb or visitor accommodation use is not out of character to this part of the
neighborhood in Philadelphia. And we will show you a few examples of nearby Airbnb listings.
And then my client has in the past used this property or other properties for Airbnb purposes, and we have reviews, which you'll see are very good.
And then we'll review the maps of the area, photographs of the interior of the property, just showing what these properties look like from the inside.
from the inside and you'll see the great care that my client puts um with respect to these properties
And you'll see the great care that my client puts with respect to these properties.
uh and then we'll also look at property the property from uh outside uh from the left and
right of the property in this surrounding area and then we have simple floor plans there are actually
two separate building structures here one facing longshore and then there's a parking lot uh where
there's another building at the end of that parking lot so the the front structure has four units in
the back structure just has one unit. And then we'll show you the RCO meeting notice as well as
proof of mailing of that notice or application for appeal that we filed on behalf of Rosa Realty
LLC, our deed to the property showing that Rosa Realty LLC is the owner of the property, as well
as our certificate of tax clearance showing that my client has paid all real estate taxes with
respect to this property through the date of this hearing. And then at the conclusion of my
presentation, I would ask that Danielio virtually raise his hand, be sworn in. I'll have a few
questions for him. All right. Are no is refusal? Yes, we're an RSA 3 property. What I would say is
is that this is almost a 12,000 square foot property, off-street parking, on a commercial
quarter, next to other commercial uses. And again, there's two existing building structures there,
which you can see would speak nothing of the RSA 3 qualifications.
We're simply asking to have visitor accommodations.
I know this board typically only grants temporary variances of three years.
Given my client's reputation in the community,
given the unique circumstances of having a 12,000 square foot lot
with two building structures on the commercial corridor with off-street parking,
I would ask that the board grant a temporary variance of five years.
Again, I think this is a project and a property that speaks as to allowing that type of discretion.
Letter of non-opposition, we met with the community.
Again, he's a well-known quantity within the community itself.
It was a pretty straightforward presentation.
And here's a summary as well.
And again, what really got them was the off-street parking.
In fact, there were two building structures that kind of were in a commercial corridor
where there's a commercial, humongous commercial property just to the right of us as well, as an example.
And then nearby Airbnbs, as you can see within this vicinity, there's a lot going on here.
And for good reason, well, we'll take a look at the map.
But in the map, you'll see we're just off of 95. So I think a lot of people are like seeing an alternative of this part of Philadelphia and Tacony to have visitor accommodation use.
And then the reviews are very good for my client. So he takes great pride in his Airbnbs.
And you'll see that for the pictures as well. But you also see the mix mix zoning here.
right so we have rsa3 which again we're almost a 12 000 square foot lot um exactly 11 483 square
feet but you know we're on longshore avenue which is um cmx2 and then going this direction is where
we're pretty close to 95 and railroad tracks and then you can see that from here as well here's 95
here's some railroad tracks here's a little bit of a park as a buffer but basically we're at the end
or you can think about it, the beginning of a neighborhood.
And then our interior photos, again, my client takes great pride
in what he's offering as visitor accommodation use.
And then this is an aerial view.
I thought that really speaks volumes, but here's Longshore Avenue.
Here's the front building structure, which has four units in it.
Again, with off-street parking here, as you can see, there are multiple parking spots here.
And then here's the rear building structure with four units in the front, one unit in the back.
And then this is just, again, from Longshore, which shows this pretty massive lot here.
To the right of us is a rather large commercial building.
And then this is just showing the rear building structure and the additional off-street parking for that particular structure.
And then this is our proof of posting for today's hearing.
And then this is the 4900 block of Longshore, both from the right and left perspectives.
And then again, you'll see that it's significant off-street parking for this property.
And then this is something we simply created, but, you know, you have the two units on the,
there's no basement use, but the two units on the first floor, direct access unit number one
is two bedroom one bath unit number two is a one bedroom one bath you go up a flight of steps you
one bath. You go up a flight of steps, you have two additional units, one bedroom, one bath,
and another one bedroom, one bath. Then this is for the larger structure, and it's basically a
single family home for all intents and purposes. You have one, two, three, four bedrooms. That's
meant for more family visiting the Philadelphia area. And our RCO meeting notice. We, you know,
have a community meeting on January 9th at 7 p.m. These are, this is our proof of mailing
for that meeting. Our application for appeal that we filed on behalf of Rose of Realty LLC,
the owner of the property. Our deed to the property showing that Rose of Realty LLC is the owner.
and then our certificate of tax claims i'm going to stop sharing my screen i would ask that uh
before he comes on could you uh do you have a documentation of the accessory parking
no we don't we could not find that i think that the the use is rather limited uh the the file for
this property is rather limited but as you can see it it does you know this is not something we
created. I know. How many spots do you think you believe do you have for parking? So I would ask
my client. Okay, sure. All right, bring them on. Danilo has been allowed to speak. Could you state
your name, please, and spell for the court stenographer? Good morning. My name is Danilo
borgo's first name d-a-n-i-l-o last name is b-u-r-g-o-s do you swear or affirm to tell the
truth the whole truth nothing but the truth yes sir please proceed counsel yes first danielio did
you hear everything i had to state today about your zoning matter yes sir and is it true and
correct yes and do you adopt it as your own testimony yes okay and then you heard what the
the chairman asked me in terms of a question of how many parking spots can does this prop does
this property uh fit uh we can put we we fit eight cars in the parking lot that's four compact cars
and then four pickup trucks all right i don't uh mr chair i don't know if you have any uh questions
regarding hillary do you have any you have any more issues relative to the parking no i just
it because this is an rsa3 property and a change of use there should have been a mention of the
parking on the refusal that's not the fault of uh that's not the fault of the applicant
but i could tell from the documentation submitted there is accessory parking and i just wanted to
have on the record about how many spaces there were to see if if the requirement of which is
typically one-to-one but it would be a little different for visitor accommodations just wanted
to see how many were there for the record so we can know that there is parking as required in the
RSA 3 voting district. Thank you. Questions or comments from the board? No, Chair. Mr. Chairman.
Hillary, any other follow-up? Mr. Knackenstein, I just want to go back to your comments at the
beginning about visitor accommodations use and the number of units. You are correct. Typically,
um there are not um for visitor accommodations the number of units is not listed it's just
applied to the entire structure or the entire property um i did notice that there were five
units in your presentation the refusal said four i think the refusal says four because it looks like
even though there's a reference in the history to this the accessory structure the garage being
converted to a dwelling unit um i don't think it was ever like officially zoned that way even though
there's a note that it was done um so i think that's why there's this discrepancy between
what's there and and what's on the refusal so i just wanted to note note that for the record
because i did see that as well yeah my own comment is i i did it looks like the record's
somewhat spotty for this property i just want to make sure that you know should the board grant
to our variants, that we would have no issues getting a CO for that backbuilding.
It looks like there were permits issued.
I don't know why it's not five of public record, but it looks like based on a refusal,
you can imply that there's only a recognized four units, not that fifth unit.
But regardless, we just want to make sure we have no issues.
I believe that the issue of the fifth unit would be addressed through the CO process.
if that is not the case
please let me know but we've had this come up
before with visitor accommodations
cases where the number of units
where the number of units that the city has on record is not what's actually
that the city has on record is not
what's actually there but because of
there, but because it's visitor accommodations,
it's not about the number of units. So in that case,
when I have discussed this with Ellen, I,
they've just said recommended that we put a proviso to get a certificate of
occupancy and then they can just make sure all of the existing units are up
to code.
Thank you.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
audience. I see no hands. Planning Commission. Thank you, Chair Bergman, and good morning,
David Vecto with the City Planning Commission. Chairman and board members, the comprehensive
plan recommends a change in zoning at this location from residential single family to
residential multifamily. The appellant requests permission for visitor accommodations in a
legally non-conforming multifamily building. The question that the code requires us to ask for this
use variances whether the appellant could not use this property as long-term rentals. Commission
staff has not heard testimony to that effect. The City Planning Commission recommends that the
board deny the use variance for visitor accommodations. Thank you. MI 2023-006-506-4910
Longshore Avenue. I vote yes with proviso. Must obtain certificate of occupancy and temporary
variance expires 4-10-20-28. Thomas Holliman, my vote is yes with proviso. James Snell, my vote is
yes with proviso. Thank you, counsel. Thank you. All right, number 10, MI 2023-006-522-2617
North 11th Street. Henry Clinton is the attorney.
There's a recommendation of support from the 37th
Ward. Vote was 22 to 1
in support.
Oh, I'm sorry, in support. 22 to 1 in support.
Correct, Mr. Chairman. Thank you. Good morning. Mr. Clinton, could you state your name
please and spell for the court stenographer? Sure. My name is Henry Clinton, H-E-N-R-Y
Clinton, C-L-I-N-T-O-N. Right. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth and
nothing but the truth? I do. Could you identify your client, the relationship to this property?
Sure. My client is Joseph Gitterman, G-I-T-E-R-M-A-N, and he's the principal of both LLCs,
which are the owners of the property. Mr. Holliman has a few questions for you, sir.
Good morning, counsel. Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to his
accuracy? I do. Did you email all the exhibits and documents as required five days in advance
to this hearing? We have. Thank you. Please proceed and share your screen. Thank you, Mr.
Holloman. Mr. Chairman, is that the cover sheet visible? We can, yes, sir. Good morning, Mr.
Chairman, members of the board. I'm here on behalf of both LLCs, which own the property,
and Joseph Gitterman, G-I-T-E-R-M-A-N, is on the call with me.
This is a presentation for a three-family dwelling in an RM1 zoning district
where there are already eight triplexes on the block.
In fact, the community group that we met with, the 37th Ward,
actually meets on this particular block,
so they're very familiar with what's going on on the block.
This is my table of contents containing exhibits A1 through A11.
And at the bottom, you can see the zoning records.
I pulled out three of the zoning records that were recently approved.
I also have photographs of five additional multifamily, three-unit properties that have been in existence for over a decade on this block.
The refusal is all-dimensional and one-use.
The size of the lot would give us by right in this RM1 zoning district two units because the lot is undersized by about 39 feet.
We're arguing that this particular variance, as I did on the other three that I've had approved by the board on this block, it's a de minimis variance request,
as is the occupied space, which we're off by 10%, and the rear yard, which we're off by 2%, excuse me, by 2 feet in depth.
We do have an RCO letter of support, as the chairman mentioned at the outset, overwhelming support, 22 to 1.
This has been a long, vacant lot.
The community group acknowledges that it is RM1.
We're not that far off on getting three units by right.
And like they did with the three others that we had approved on this block by different owners, the community group is in full support of the three family dwelling.
of the three three family dwelling so an aerial photograph to give the board some perspective
So an aerial photograph to give the board some perspective.
where my cursor is is the hope partnership for education building that's where the 37th ward
meets and directly across the street there's five already existing three family dwellings
and i'll show you a photograph of the facade so you can actually see the meters on the front of
the building uh to the left of the existing five is another three family dwelling that has been
approved. I had those zoning records at the end of the presentation. To the right of the five
three-family dwellings, another three-family dwelling has been approved. And then down
towards the northern part of the block on the east side is another three-family dwelling.
Our particular lot, again, a long vacant lot, which is adjacent to the Hope Partnership for
Education, is right here where my cursor is. And that's what we're asking the board to approve
today. These are the triplexes directly across the street that I just showed you an aerial
photograph of. Again, they've been in place for at least a decade and possibly more. This
is proof that our zoning notice has been posted in front of the property. Again, here's the
vacant lot. And this is Hope Partnership for Education down at the southern end of the
block. These are the plans.
Let me just reduce that a little bit. I think it's too large to see. So basically, we have a brick facade, which is consistent with the neighborhood. We have bays at the second and third floor. We have a seven foot rear yard.
Our floor plan is basically three two-bedroom units.
First unit, basement of first floor.
Second unit, third floor.
Third unit on the third floor, and there is access to a rooftop deck.
Trash, there'll be trash storage within each unit, as well as in the rear yard will be trash containers that will be able to be taken out once a week.
This is an elevation of the rear of the property.
Again, just to show the board, we're actually within the height limitation.
We're about 35 feet.
As the board knows, we're permitted to go up to 38 feet, but we're staying well below that.
The remaining documents are the application, our tax clearance.
Zoning map, again, indicating that it is an RM1 block.
And as I say, the requests that we're asking for variances are what we consider the minimus.
This is the deed indicating ownership.
Notice mailing to all the surrounding neighbors.
We sent out 121 pieces of mail.
The community group, it was well-attended meeting, as you can see from the vote.
And these are the multifamily that are already existing on the property beyond the five that have been in place for at least a decade.
This zoning permit was issued March of 2022, the 2616 for three family dwelling.
Right here.
Issued March of 2021.
New construction.
Three family dwelling.
And finally, the one at the far end of the block on the west side on the north end is 2638, approved February of 2023 for the three-family dwelling.
Let me find out where that is.
It is multifamily.
I mean, for whatever reason, it doesn't say three, but as an officer of the Corps, I represent that I actually was involved in this, and it is a three-family dwelling.
So with that, Mr. Chairman, I'd just like to conclude that, you know, the request is for use on the block that is consistent with what's already there.
There's at least eight other three-family dwellings on this RM1 area.
It's on the same block where the community group meets.
They're well familiar that these vacant lots need to be filled in, and they are over time.
We're not asking for any relief with regard to height.
Our open space relief requests are de minimis, and we're a mere 39 feet from getting this project by right.
And we're asking for the board to look kindly upon this application.
With that, I would ask my client to unmute himself.
Mr. Gitterman, can you unmute yourself, and we'll have you adopt my testimony.
Good morning, Mr. Gitterman.
Yeah, good morning. How are you?
Hi. Could you state your name and spell, please, for the court stenographer?
state your name and spell please for the court stenographer yes my name is joseph j-o-s-e-p-h
Yes, my name is Joseph, J-O-S-O.
and the last name is gitterman g-i-t-e-r-m-a-n you swear for him to tell the truth the whole
truth and nothing but the truth yes i do proceed counsel mr gitterman uh were you on the call the
zoom call when i presented your project yes and if you had the opportunity to testify would you
adopt my testimony as your own and as true and correct yes thank you mr gitterman
Questions or comments from the board?
No, Mr. Chairman.
LeBaron?
Hold on one minute, Henry.
LeBaron?
Jim Snell?
Phil, what was the question?
I'm having trouble here with my audio.
Do you have any questions?
Oh, no.
No, I don't.
I'm able to hear, but I'm just having trouble.
Questions or comments from our attorney, Hillary Emberson?
Not at this time, Mr. Chair.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
I see no hands.
Planning Commission.
Thank you, Chairman, and good morning.
David Vecta with the City Planning Commission.
Chairman and board members, the comprehensive plan recommends a change in zoning at this location from residential multifamily to residential single-family.
The appellant seeks three dwelling units on a vacant 1,140-square-foot lot.
because of the zoning overlay the appellant is allowed two dwelling units without the overlay
the appellant would be allowed three dwelling units this unit count would match the character
of this block face the city planning commission recommends the board grant a proposed use
variance for a third dwelling unit and the associated dimensional variances thank you
MI 2023 006 522 2617 North 11th Street I vote yes Thomas Holloman my vote is yes
James Snell my vote is yes
Thank you counsel
Thank you Mr. Chairman
So number 12
MI 2023
006 538
6658 Keystone Street
Dangle McElhatton is the attorney
Letter of non-opposition
from the TAC
Coney Civic Association
Daniel McElhatton is in as a
panelist. Good morning, counsel. Could you please state your name and spell
for the court stenographer?
Unmute.
Thank you. Good morning. Could you state your name and spell
for the court stenographer? Daniel P. McElhatton, D-A-N-I-E-L-P, as in Patrick,
M-C, capital E-L-H-A-T-T-O-N.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
I do, sir.
Could you identify your client, the relationship to this property?
My client is Vlad Brodsky, B-R-O-D-S-K-Y.
He is the principal of 6658 Keystone, LLC, which is the title owner to the property on Keystone Street.
Mr. Holloman has a few questions, sir.
Good morning, counsel.
do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to his accuracy?
I agree to the waiving the reading of the refusal, but not the accuracy of it.
Counsel for the board advised me last night that for some reason,
there was no action by L&I on the issue of the eight parking spots that were requested.
So we discussed it last night and then this morning,
And we are asking to proceed with the anticipation that the L&I would revise the refusal to address the issue of the eight parking spots.
So, Ms. Emerson, is that an accurate reflection of what we've discussed?
Yes, and I'm sorry I did not get to respond to your last email.
But yes, I will. Once the once the hearing has concluded, I will reach out to the supervisor for the particular examiner and ask them to issue a corrected refusal based on what they reviewed, which from what I see and based on my conversation with Ellen, I was just the change in use to multifamily.
But they will make the ultimate call.
And would we need to come back for an official vote from the board if they're inclined to favorably consider?
um need to come back for an official vote from the board if they're inclined to favorably consider
our variance or could we do it on the condition that that be obtained we we will just hold for
an amended refusal and the board can just vote on it once we get it back there's no need for
you know further further hearing or anything like that okay and that should be issued fairly quickly
because it will be a corrected refusal, I will request it this week.
Fine. So that is the objection to the refusal.
Okay. Okay. Did you email all the exhibits and documents as required five days in advance to this hearing?
Yes, we did, Mr. Holloman.
Thank you. Please proceed and share your screen.
all of the documents
and I'm not going to go through all of the documents
is my screen up showing
the aerial
this property circled on the screen
is on the site of the old St. Leo's Roman Catholic Church
the church was decommissioned
as a place of worship in 2013
And in 2019, Mr. Rodsky purchased an adjacent parcel here and took the convent, which was part of it, and converted that to housing.
Subsequent to that, there was a fire at the church, which was on this big lot here, and the church was destroyed.
And what remains on the lot here, circled, is the rectory building.
And that's the building that we are seeking to try to have zoned for residential use.
And, you know, you can see that it sits, it's actually around the corner from Mr.
Nockmson's project up in this area here, but it's across from Distant Park.
And on Keystone Street, there's all this street parking.
This is the old school.
And there are parking spots along the side of the building there.
And that's really where the parking would be. So we'll address that, you know, and Mr. Brodsky can confirm that there are eight spots at that location.
The proposal for 10 dwelling units, there would be five one-bedroom units, three studio apartments, and two two-bedroom units.
The Coney Civic Association not only gave a letter of approval, but their transmission to the zoning board indicated that they have no opposition to the request.
And the project manager and architect have worked on projects in this immediate area with great success.
Now, I've been doing this a long time. You don't get letters from RCOs like that very often.
And that refers to the convent that Mr. Brodsky developed.
so that, you know, ample off-street parking here at this location.
There will be eight spots for the 10 units that are in there.
And, you know, this conversion to residential is consistent with a legal, a proper use of this building.
To convert it to a single family as a rectory, it just is not feasible.
It would create a tremendous hardship and it's not feasible at all.
So I'd like to show another photograph if I might.
Counsel, is the convent on the same location?
It is. It's around the other side.
This is actually the rectory, and I'll reduce it a little bit.
So you can see that there's parking along this whole side there.
And let me see one more.
This shows the back of the school.
This is the vacant lot where the church was.
This is the view of Distant Park from Keystone Street.
Beyond Distant Park, just the park there, is the railroad tracks.
And then beyond that is I-95.
So, you know, that's clearly, it's not a, there's no significant impact on the community.
So, you know, this is really what the project is, is to take a building that was damaged in the fire, was owned not by the archdiocese at that time, owned by a private individual who had been involved as a deacon in the church, but could not repair the building to its prior condition and live in it.
and was sold to Mr. Brodsky in 2023.
uh in 2023 so we are proposing to put a potential danger to the community back to a
So we are proposing to put a potential...
legitimate uh community use and with that i'd ask mr broski to be admitted and
see if he will adopt my testimony
good morning sir mr broski please raise your virtual hand
Mr. Brodsky. I see no hands. Mr. McElhant, Mr. McElhant, you're an officer of the court.
I am. I still am. And we will take your testimony. Thank you, sir.
All right. With that, I have nothing further. 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 see no hands planning commission thank you chairman and good morning david vecto with the
city planning commission chairman and board members the comprehensive plan recommends
no change to the residential single family zoning at this location the size and configuration of
the former rectory presents a hardship to reusing this property as currently zoned we suggest the
appellant should submit a request to the city planning commission and council for a zoning
change. The building is close to public transit and the comprehensive plan supports increasing
residential density near the regional rail station. The city planning commission recommends
the board grant a variance for multifamily housing and any associated parking variances.
Thank you. We're going to hold the vote on this. And so Hillary, you touch base with
Ellen and I, and as soon as we have an answer, then we'll conduct the vote. Is that right, Hillary?
That is correct, Mr. Chair. Thank you.
Thank you, counsel.
Thank you, sir. Good day.
Number 13, MI 2023-006-540-1147 South 52nd Street.
Roger Perry is the attorney.
There was no, there was, there's no RCO letter at this point,
But there was a meeting on 325 by the 51st Ward Democratic Executive Committee.
Mr. Chair, we did receive a letter of support this morning just to update that.
Thank you.
Thank you very much.
Mr. Perry.
Good morning, Mr. Perry.
Could you unmute, please?
I'm unmuted.
Thank you.
Could you state your name for the record?
I believe you were already sworn once today.
Am I correct?
Yes, we had an earlier case, Roger Perry, P-E-R-R-Y.
Mr. Perry, could you identify your client in relationship to this property?
Yeah, I have two clients, actually. Ameslet Tedla, A-M-L-E-S-E-T-T-E-D-L-A, is the owner of the property, and her daughter is Saba Tedla, who's here today, and Saba was essentially doing the paperwork for this retirement duplex.
okay uh and mr hallman has a few questions thank you good morning counsel do you agree to waive the
reading of the refusal and stipulate to his accuracy yes we do did you email all of the
exhibits and documents as required five days in advance to this hearing yes we did thank you
please proceed and share your screen okay should be up there
yes okay great okay yeah this is a uh property 1147 south 52nd street as i indicated it's uh
owned by my client uh it was purchased um in 2019 then sort of got stalled with uh
COVID and so forth, but it was purchased with the anticipation that it had already been
renovated as a duplex. When they went to, Amoslet was going to move in here and get rental income
from the adjacent property, but when they went to get the permits, it was discovered that it was
not a legal duplex, that it was still in an RSA five single family property and so forth. But I'll
I'll show the photograph showing that it had essentially been renovated as a two-family, two units.
Let me just scroll down through.
This is the deed.
It's been posted.
The refusal is because we were asking for a duplex and an RSA 5 property was posted properly.
We had the hearing with the RCO.
I just know that I can come back to this.
but we're requesting a duplex at 1147 South 52nd Street, the adjacent property at 1145 was a duplex.
South 52nd Street, the adjacent property at 1145 was a duplex.
And the adjacent property at 1149 is actually a triplex.
Let me see what I can...
Okay, so that's...
Okay, the duplex.
This is the block across the street, a series of it.
taxes have been paid and this is the plan the layout for the property it's a basement
as rehabbed and three floors it's a unit one and unit two let me see if I can put up the
you should be seeing the properties this is as it exists when they bought it it was metered with two
meters a separate entrance into the basement area the interior had been renovated it has an entrance
way uh which separates into two uh access uh ways um let's see what we got here
uh there's a kitchen in each unit uh there's bathroom in each unit this is the stairs going
upstairs i apologize for the flipping leaf up this is going from uh to the second floor
uh there's a bathroom in each unit um three bedrooms on the uh let me see second and third
floors three bedrooms the uh first and second they're they're bi-level units uh bedroom bedroom
bedroom so forth and this was as uh when they bought the property in the second kitchen and
so forth and so on so the property is essentially fully renovated but of course uh because it's
not a legal duplex. They couldn't get permits to operate it, and that's why we're here today,
in order to get it legalized as a duplex. This was the layout, the plan that was provided to me
by Ms. Tedla. And the block itself is, on this area of 52nd Street, is essentially multifamily,
and the two adjacent units are multifamily.
We did meet with the community organization.
As Hillary, the board, I believe, indicated,
they got a letter either last night or this morning
indicated that they were actually in support
of the variance for a duplex.
If I can ask, I believe Saba Tedler is in the audience
and she can review and adopt my testimony.
Are you there, Saba?
Yes, and they have been allowed to speak.
Could you please state your name?
Saba Tedla.
And spell for the court stenographer.
S-A-B-A, last name T-E-D-L-A.
Right.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Is this your property?
This is my mother's property.
okay hillary we can take her testimony
um if she's if she's i understand she was filling out the paperwork but if she's not
the deeded owner i don't think that we can okay i can just ask her a question about she did the
paperwork for the uh for her mother who's older and was moving into the property just a question
of whether or not she's familiar with my testimony,
I'm not saying that she's the owner of the property.
Up to the board.
Yeah, that's fine.
If you want to have her as a witness
to answer a couple of questions
based on her familiarity with the property, that's fine.
But I don't think she could adopt your testimony
as she's not the owner.
Saba, you heard my testimony?
And you arranged,
your mother obviously was intending to move
from the midwest i understand is that correct yes and uh did you handle the paperwork when
the property was purchased yes i handled all the uh paperwork as well as all the affairs of my mom
okay and uh was the property essentially uh looking as i presented it today when you purchased
the property as a setup with two meters and uh configured as a duplex yes okay and uh was there
anything in my testimony that was in air that your mother would have an objection to no thank you
questions from the board no mr chairman no chair questions or comments from our attorney hillary
emerson not at this time question or comments from the virtual audience
I see no hands. Planning Commission. Thank you Chairman and good morning David Vecto with the
i see no hands planning commission thank you chairman and good morning david
City Planning Commission. The comprehensive plan recommends no change to the residential single
family zoning at this location. This property appears to have been converted without the
benefit of permits. The City Planning Commission recommends that the board deny the use variance
for two dwelling units. Thank you. MI 2023-006-540-1147 South 52nd Street. I vote yes.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes.
James Snell, my vote is yes.
Thank you.
You have your vote, sir.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Number 18, MI 2023-006-843-2731 North Darien Street.
Vern Anastasio is the attorney.
There was a meeting held February 15, 2024, by the 12th and Cambria Advisory Board.
Anastasio, you've already been sworn.
Just for the record, could you please state your name?
Yep, it's Vern Anastasio, A-N-A-S-T-A-S-I-O.
I'm sorry I represent
Killian Gerson
Thank you
Mr. Harmon has a few questions
Good morning counsel
Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal
and stipulate to his accuracy
Yes sir
Did you email all the exhibits and documents
as required five days in advance of this hearing
Yes sir
Thank you
Please proceed and share your screen
Thank you.
Mr. Chair and members of the board, this is a fairly straightforward case.
This is the property right here.
It is zoned RM1, just like every other property on the block, save the corners, just like
every other property across the street, and just like every other property beyond that.
It's an RM1 neighborhood.
it uh so we want to make sure that that is um and here is another aerial view of the property in
question the application is for a two-family dwelling and you'd probably say well if it's rm1
and you ask for two family why are you here why did it get refused literally got refused for
a tiny, tiny amount of square footage. We have 676 square feet of the lot, and it's required
that the lot be 720 square feet. Obviously, we can't make the lot any bigger, and this property
was purchased by my client in 2021 as a two-family dwelling, completely rehabbed.
And he believed after checking the RM1 status that it was a legal two-family dwelling when he purchased it, only to find out later when he submitted for the rental license, he could only get one for one unit rented.
And that's when he contacted me, and we've been through this process.
We did meet with the RCO.
I believe they sent a report of some sort.
Virtually no immediate neighbors showed up. It was just the leadership. But I've also sent and submitted under separate cover. Here's some photos, and I'll scroll down these while I talk. Under separate cover, several photos of the block itself.
there's 14 vacant lots on the on just just this block in addition to the 14 vacant lots
there are six vacant structures all boarded up or masonry sealed so it is a terribly difficult
block uh to to live on especially in a single family situation but this is the property my
client purchased as you can see uh this is from 2021 uh completely rehabbed
he purchased it and then subsequently found out that despite the classification of rm1
uh they're you know about a hundred square feet uh as far as the lot is concerned short and because
of that, we're unable to get the rental license for the two-family dwelling, and that's why
we're here, because we can't make the lot any bigger, because the difference between
what the lot is and what it should be for a two-family dwelling is de minimis in nature
as far as square footage is concerned, and because the property and the block is zoned
is zoned RM1, and the block itself is blighted, to say the least. We respectfully request the
RM1 and the block
itself is blighted to say
granting of the variants. And I do have Killian Gersig here, if he can please raise his hand.
Counsel, could you tell me what happened at the zoning board, the RCO meeting?
Yeah, nobody showed up, basically. And the leadership, you know, just heard us. And I
I believe they sent a report to you.
I did not receive a report.
Hillary, we don't have anything, do we?
We do not, Mr. Chair.
Okay, all right, thank you.
Yeah, but we did, I mean, there's proof of the mailing and, of course, of the, sorry, we have a lot of pictures here.
By the way, it's also already broken up with electric as well, and I do have plans to submit.
And here's the letter that went out. And here are all the different addresses that were mailed for a total of 152 individual households.
Okay, bring your client on, please.
If Mr. Gersing could please raise his hand.
Billion Gersing has been allowed to speak.
Thank you.
Yes, I'm on.
Hi, could you please state your name and spell for the court stenographer?
Yes, my name is Killian Gersing. First name Killian, K-I-L-I-A-N, last name Gersing, G-E-R-S-I-N-G.
Do you swear for him to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Please proceed, counsel.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. Gersing, did you hear my presentation to the board this morning?
I did.
Is it true and accurate to the best of your knowledge?
It is.
And do you adopt it as your own testimony?
I do. Thank you.
Questions from the board?
No, Mr. Chair.
Questions or comments from our attorney, Hillary Emerson?
Not at this time, Mr.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
We have Conlon Crosley with their hand raised. They have been allowed to speak.
Good morning. Could you please state your name and spell for the court stenographer?
Good morning. My name is Conlon Crosley, C-O-N-L-A-N.
crossley c-r-o-s-l-e-y you swear a firm to wait a minute do you swear a firm to tell the truth
the whole truth nothing but the truth i do uh are you a neighbor no sir i work for uh councilman
young the fifth district councilman okay and i have a letter from the coordinating rco
Norman Wooten. I wanted to read it out. He sent it to me
a few weeks ago. It says, regarding 2731 North Darien Street, ZP 2023-01-1217.
Dear Honorable Chairperson, the blow is the summary of the public community meeting regarding
the above zoning proposal, the final position of the 12th and Cambrian Advisory Board RCO was to
oppose. The vote count was 10 to 5. The attendees felt it would be overcrowding the block with too
many cars and unnecessary populations. Mr. Chair, I have to object to that letter in that
there weren't 11 people at the meeting, so I don't know where the 10 came from.
Mr. Crossley, could you, if possible, could you send us a copy of that letter?
Of course. What's a good email?
Could we put it in the chat?
Absolutely, Chair.
It'll be in the chat for you, Mr. Crosley. Thank you very much.
Yes, sir.
Anyone else in the virtual audience?
I see no hands.
Planning Commission.
Thank you, Chair Bergman, and good morning, David Vecto.
With the City Planning Commission, Chairman and Board Members,
the comprehensive plan recommends a change in zoning of this location
from residential multifamily to residential single family.
The proposed dimensional variance is less than 10%
of what is required by the code for a second dwelling unit.
The variance is minor and does not conflict
with the purpose and spirit of the zoning code.
The City Planning Commission recommends
that the board grant the proposed dimensional variance
for lot area.
Thank you.
MI 2023-006-843-2731 North Daring Street, I vote yes.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes.
James Snell, my vote is yes.
Vern, we have this next case is yours, too.
MI 2023-006-844-1709 Christian Street.
Vern Anastasio is the attorney.
There's a letter of support from the South of South Neighborhood Association,
and there's a letter of opposition from the North of Washington Avenue Coalition.
Just for the record, could you...
Just for the record, yes, I'm sorry, Mr.
Yes, go ahead.
I'm sorry, Mr. Sher, I just want to interject quickly after.
I just want to interject quickly after this case, if we could go back to I have it again, Stevens Road.
OK, I thank you so much.
Sorry to interrupt, Mr.
It's OK. Just for the record, could you please state your name again?
Yeah, Vern Anastasio on behalf of Elise Carroll, who's the owner of 1709 Christian Street.
OK, Mr. Hallman has a few questions, sir.
Thank you.
good morning counsel good morning do you agree to waive the reading of the
refusal and stipulate to his accuracy i do did you email all the exhibits and documents as required
five days in advance to this hearing i have thank you please proceed and share your screen
thank you my sheet my screen is shared 1709 christian street was purchased by uh my client
Elise Carroll, and it's for the application. It's a legalization, another legalization of a
pre-existing, non-conforming, three-family, multi-family, three-family use. If you take a
look at the notes, it's been a three-family, it's been three units. First in 1960, it was a two-family
dwelling in a commercial space. But since 2006, that commercial space did turn to a
residential unit, and it's been a three-family ever since. So here's the interior photos
of the property in question. The Registered Community Organization, I know you have two
letters from two different rcos is sasna the south of south neighbors association and as you can see
this is the exterior and my client purchased this as a a functional three-family dwelling
with three electric meters and for better part of uh 20 years it's been um a three-family dwelling
prior to excuse me while i try and find my plans i don't know where they went
prior to uh that as i said it was a commercial space uh with
a two-family dwelling above but as you can see on the first floor that was converted years ago
let me take a let me walk you through the plan so you see there's ample space in the back by the way
for trash so in the basement we just have a sitting room and a bedroom and the first floor
unit is 832 square feet with living and a kitchen and a bath on the first floor
there's also mechanicals down in the basement the second unit is 540 square
feet again this is all pre-existing and the third unit is 449 square feet
another one-bedroom unit with a deck out the rear
we met with the neighboring community organization they did in fact give us a
letter of non-opposition material is not loading correctly for some reason but I
have this exhibit already sent to you and the exhibit packets that do
demonstrate that over 125 individual households were mailed the RCO meeting
was very well attended, and an overwhelming majority of those in question at the meeting
supported the variance merely because my client recently purchased it, and it was already
a three-family dwelling, and there's a long history of that use. And for all those reasons,
and for the just impossibility structural-wise, not to mention financially, for converting this
property back to a single family residence after all these decades i respectfully request the
granting of this variance and i asked miss elise carroll to raise her hand okay
good morning miss carroll
do we see her hand yes she she is unmuted okay hi could you please state your name
Hi, could you please state your name and spell for the court's sonographer?
and spell for the court stenographer.
It seems she may be having counsel,
you're also the court will take your testimony questions from appreciate that.
Questions from the board?
No, Mr. Chair.
Questions or comments from our attorney, Hilary Anderson?
Not at this time, Mr. Chair.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
We have Madeline. They have been allowed to speak.
Hi, could you please state your name and spell for the court stenographer?
Madeline Shacumba, M-A-D-E-L-I-N-E, Shacumba, S-Bagans, excuse me, Sam, A-M-K-O-M-B-A.
All right. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Are you a neighbor?
i am representing the north of washington avenue coalition okay please proceed we are
in our area we have two coordinating rcos yep one in them okay and we are uh in opposition to this
because the fact is is that in 2006 they tried to make this a three-family dwelling
and it and they have an appeal and it was dismissed which meant that this should not have been a
three-family draw. Okay it should have been two-family drawing. I asked the gentleman,
I attended the meeting and I noticed that he was using the basement as living quarters.
I don't have he showed you his pictures and everything and if you go back to that area
where the basement was at, you would notice that there's no egress out of there except
for the window. Now, in order to reach the window in the basement, someone has to climb,
especially if it's a child, would have to climb on top of a step to reach it, to get
out of that basement. This is one of the reasons why I oppose that the basement could be used
as a thing. If you notice on your refusal, it said notes to the ZBA. It says it was dismissed
appeal for a three-family drawing. So it's been used illegally all those years as a three-family
drawing, which was not meant to be a three-family drawing. And we continue to say that we don't
mind it being a two-family drawing but we feel as though a three-family drawing is it was never
supposed to have been and it's been what you said i said okay okay also we noticed that uh
the property uh like i said does not provide an egress if that to me is a death trap you cannot
get out of there okay and uh um it does not provide the minimum space for that's required
for a three-family daughter also i'd like to know that let you know that we are i told you before
co-ordinating in our area we have two coordinating rcos and i'm one of them so i'm equal status
with sasna okay and they say they're sasta disagreed with you oh yeah we have a right
to it could be too cool okay no no i agree i i totally agree i just want to be clear
yeah we disagreed on it and uh uh as i'm saying pointing out to why you know and that uh we feel
that it should be made a two-family drawing we have no problem like that and the basement should
not be used as drawings because of its inadequate and i have having a proper egress out of there
And the window, if you look at his plans and everything, you'll see the window is small
and it doesn't even seem like it would accommodate a full grown adult trying to even get out
that window.
Now, you can look at his own plans that he submitted to you and that will definitely
show that that's what's happening there.
If he wants to use his two family drawing and skip the basement as a drawing, we ain't
got no problem with it.
We are asking that it not be approved as a three-family, but as a two.
Thank you very much.
Mr. Chair, if I may.
Let me just see if there's anyone else in the virtual audience.
Any other comments from the virtual audience?
Yes, we have a Stan Swinski with their hand raised.
They have been allowed to speak.
Sir, could you please state your name is spelled for the court stenographer?
Hello?
I'm sorry.
That was a mistake.
My hand should not have been raised.
Thank you very much, sir.
I appreciate that.
Plenty, council.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. And I do appreciate Ms. Chacumba's remarks and her testimony. And we heard it loud and clear at the meeting, and she was able to voice her concern in her vote. As you know, the vote was overwhelmingly in support of our appeal.
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
And I do appreciate Ms. Chacomba's.
we did address the building code requirement issue. We understand that the first floor
and the small living space as part of the basement will need, of course, to do a building
plan review. And we will have to meet the building code egress requirements prior to getting a
certificate of occupancy, which will precede us getting any rental license. So loud and clear,
We understand that there may be building code issues that need to be addressed, and we're willing to do that.
But we can't do that unless or until we have the zoning for what's already there.
And that conversion did not take place by my client.
My client purchased the property as the pre-existing three-family.
She now wants to make sure that it is safe.
And the way to do that is to legalize the use and then get up to code on the building
code requirements pursuant to securing the variance so that we can ultimately get the
rental license for the three family.
And we also know that means it's going to be required to have a sprinkler system.
We understand all of that and we're willing to do it.
Planning Commission.
good afternoon chairman and uh david vector with the city planning commission chairman and board
members the comprehensive plan recommends no change to the residential multi-family zoning
at this location the appellant purchased the property with a ground floor dwelling unit that
had been built without the benefit of permits the city planning commission recommends the board deny
either proposed use variants for third dwelling unit?
She reasonably relied on, you know,
the fact that it was a three-family.
Again, she's not responsible for that conversion.
MI 2023-006-844.
Excuse me, Mr. Chairman.
Can we take this case on the advisory
or executive session?
Sure, we can.
Thank you.
So what we'll do is we'll vote on this next Wednesday at 930 a.m.
Thank you.
Number 16.
MI 2023-006-599-1150 Stevens Road.
Isaac Slepner is the attorney.
and there's a letter of support from the somerton civic association
mr chair i can confirm that we have received the exhibit packet um and that it is now complete
thank you okay thank you
good morning again mr schlepner
oh yeah you're right it's afternoon now thank you good afternoon chair you were already sworn
just for the record state your name yes isaac i-s-a-a-c last name slepner s-l-e-p-n-e-r
council for the property owners greg and karen olenski and i have my clients here on the call
as well. All right. Mr. Hellman has a few questions. Sure. Good afternoon, counsel. Do you
agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to his accuracy? Yes. Did you email
all the exhibits and documents as required five days in advance to this hearing?
I did, and I did receive a follow-up email earlier this morning after the bit of confusion from
the board staff regarding the deed, but board staff and counsel have all the documents at this
point. Thank you. Please proceed and share your screen. All right, thank you. Will do. Bear with
me, please. Oh, wait. Here we go. All right, here we go. Can everybody see that? Yes. All right,
wonderful. So, we are here today about my client's home at 1150 Stevens Road.
scrolling through exhibit one this is our notice of refusal the refusal was for multiple principal
structures the issue of course is that what is proposed to be built at the rear yard of
my client's house is not a principal structure it is a decorative gazebo for lack of a better term
It is a decorative gazebo, for lack of a better term, but I would say it's even less so than a gazebo.
It doesn't have walls.
It's a roof, a pavilion with legs that's going to be built there standing on concrete supports.
And I'll show you all the plans.
But we are appealing only one refusal, and that would be for multiple principal structures.
The property is in an RSD-1 zone.
it. Exhibit two here is our application for appeal from November 20th of last year
with all of the questions answered. The only variance, as I mentioned previously, is for use.
Exhibit three is our project information form with all of the requested information about
my clients, their property, their proposed project, my information is in there, etc.
That's from 11-15-23. Exhibit 4 is the letter that I sent on behalf of my clients to the
prescribed list that was sent to me by planning, describing, again, the property itself, my
clients the project proposed, the refusal and notifying them of the public meeting
of Somerton Civic Association. CC council planning, Somerton Civic and the
zoning board on that letter. This is the cert of mailing and it was sent out on
12 11 of 23 I don't know if you can see the date stamp exactly to this list of it's a pretty um
it's not a very dense neighborhood in the northeast where my clients live so there were
only about 25 addresses to be sent out to but they were all sent on 12 11 of 23.
um this is a map giving you kind of the general location of my client's property which is right
here 1150 Stevens which is roughly by South Hampton and the Boulevard very far
part of the Northeast there their block and their neighborhood are all single
family homes on fairly large parcels of land and this is from Philadelphia's
property website showing you their property in particular which is on I
it's a cul-de-sac so there's really no traffic at all there and they are catty
corner from a country club and just inside Philadelphia from County Line
Road over here. Exhibit 7 are the project plans. So as you can see this is simply
a roof to be made of wood and legs made of wood to stand on concrete plinths
so that ultimately my clients can entertain in their backyard, have people over.
They may hook up a TV.
There may be electrical service out there, but that is for their general contractor and master electrician to deal with.
But as you can see, this is not a thing that's in any way a principal structure.
It's not habitable.
It's simply a roof on legs.
And these are the stamped engineer's plans.
This is a site plan where you can see where it will be set back. The lot area is over 27,000 square feet. The house itself is 2,790 square feet. And then back here, this pavilion itself is going to be a total of 726 square feet.
next I have many photos to give you a better illustration so this is the front of my client's
property you can see this is the house front yard and you can see a little bit around the side here
that's a fence and beyond that fence is their backyard second photo is just kind of a good
front on view of the house this is a house view of the backyard looking towards their neighbor here
that's 1200 but as and this is the project site these four covered things
are going to be where the concrete plinths end up standing to support the
structure. This is another view looking from the top of their backyard you can
see it's a bit terraced and here are the spots where the plinths are going to be
this is the rear of their house and this is a detached storage building that
stands there currently. This is another view of the project site and again a
view of their neighbor's house here at 1200. They are 1150 and this is the back
of my client's house right here. And then this is another side view again of the
And then this is another side view again of the project site and again their neighbor's house here at 1200. This is my client's property at 1150. All this grassy area is theirs and this paved over area is where the project is going to be situated.
project site.
uh this is the letter of support of february 6 24 from somerton civic association um as the
letter recites the vote was 25 in favor zero opposed it was a unanimous vote in favor
um all of uh um councilman o'neill's office was cc'd as was planning and board council and the
board. Exhibit 11 is photos, five photos taken on 3-20-24, which was 21 days ago, of the orange
poster posted at the front of my client's house, and my client actually posted it twice because
it's rather wide property, so he did one over here, as you can see, and a second one closer to
the mailbox and garage, about as far forward towards the sidewalk as you can put it. He
doesn't necessarily want people tromping all over his property to look at it, but he does want them
to be informed. So those are the photos of the orange notice. Exhibit 12, not sure why the system
isn't giving me a tax cert per se, but this I ran by my client's social security number and
the OPA number for his house. It said it will pass the clearance and this is also my investigation
from the Philadelphia Tax Center showing a zero property tax balance. An additional exhibit is
this letter from Councilman O'Neill's office dated 4-1-24 in support of the granting of the variance.
This is a copy of the deed to my client's home.
As you can see, Gregory J. and Karen L. Olenski purchased the house in December of 86, which
at that time was known as 15141 Worthington, but it is the same property that we're here
on today, which is 1150 Stevens, and that is evidenced by this mortgage, which was recorded
on the same or almost the same date in 1986.
Hang on, the deed was recorded on December 15th of 86, and this mortgage was given on April of 96, and this mortgage recites the address as being 15141 Worthington, a.k.a. 1150 Stevens.
So those are evidence that my clients are the owners of the property.
And with that, I would call my client, Gregory Olenski, to adopt my testimony.
And I believe that Alice Udovich from the Councilman's Office is also here to offer the Councilman's support.
Mr. Olenski, could you please state your name and spell for the court stenographer?
Gregory Olenski, G-R-E-G-O-R-Y-O-L-E-N-S-K-I.
You swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
Please proceed, counsel.
Thank you.
Mr. Olenski, did you hear all of the testimony that I offered to the board?
I did.
And did you see all of the documents that I was presenting to the board?
I did.
And would you adopt that testimony as though you had given it yourself?
Yes, I would.
And was all of that testimony true and correct to the best of your knowledge?
Thank you.
I don't have anything further.
Questions from the board?
No, Mr. Chairman.
No, Chair.
Questions or comments from our attorney, Hillary Emerson?
Not at this time.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
Yes, Chair.
We have Alex Udovich.
They haven't allowed to speak.
Good morning, Alice. Alice, could you state your name, please, and spell for the court stenographer?
Good afternoon, Chairman, members of the board. Alice Udovich, A-L-I-C-E-U-D-O-V-I-C-H, on behalf of Councilman Brian O'Neill.
You swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Please proceed.
The councilman is happy to support the granting of the variance at this location.
And I also want to put on the record that I'm a near neighbor.
The Alenskis keep a beautiful property.
And as a neighbor, I'm happy to support the granting of the variance as well.
Thank you for calling.
We appreciate it.
Is there anyone else in the virtual audience?
I see no hands.
Planning Commission.
Thank you, Chairman.
And good afternoon.
David Fecto with the City Planning Commission.
Chairman and board members, the comprehensive plan recommends no change
to the residential single-family detached zoning at this location.
To the residential single-family detached zoning at this location, the proposal for more than one principal structure on the lot matches the character of the other homes on this block face, and it will not injure the use of adjacent properties.
The proposal for more.
The City Planning Commission recommends the board grant a proposed use variance for multiple principal structures on the lot.
Thank you. MI 2023-006-599-1150 Stevens Road, I vote yes.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes.
James Snell, my vote is yes.
Thank you, counsel.
Thank you, chair.
Thank you, board.
Have a good rest of the day.
I have nothing further.
Thank you.
Is there anyone in the virtual audience whose case has not been called from the 930 a.m. list?
I see no hands.
Thanks, everyone.
See everyone at 2 o'clock.
Good afternoon, everyone. My name is Bill Bergman, and I will be chairing the ZBA hearings this afternoon.
With me is our board member, Thomas Holloman.
Present, Mr. Chairman.
Our board member, James Snell.
Present, Mr. Chairman.
And also, LeBaron Leonard Palmer from the Division of Development Services will be serving as our alternate board member this afternoon.
Good afternoon.
Also present is our attorney, Hillary Emerson, and our executive director, Tanya Sunkett.
Here's our virtual format.
The advice of proceedings are being recorded.
Video will be available by contacting TanyaSunkett at phil.gov.
For the benefit of our court stenographer, we ask attorneys and witnesses to identify themselves before testifying.
If you're participating by phone and you wish to testify, press star 9 to raise your hand and star 6 to unmute.
To enter an appearance statement, call 267-270-5548.
Leave your email and the address of the property in question.
And finally, the question and answer box on the screen is not for comments or testimony.
All comments should be directed to our executive director, Tanya Sunkett.
Let's look at our schedule for this afternoon.
Number one, MI 2022, 005-549-1500 Winsome Street.
That case is continued.
Number nine, MI 2024-000-424-4301 Byberry Road. That case is continued.
Number 10, MI 2024-000-425-1675 South Christopher Columbus Boulevard. That case is continued.
And number 16, MI 2024, 000502, 1936 North Front Street, Cases Continued, Attorney Moving Party.
Are there any comments or additional cases to be continued?
I see no hands.
Okay, thank you.
We're going to go to our add-on list.
And number one is MI 2023-006-516-401 East Roosevelt Boulevard.
Mr. James Snell will be handling this vote on this property.
I am recused.
Okay, thanks, Mr. Chairman.
This is for the use as a child care center.
on the first and second floor, and assembly and entertainment in the basement in an existing
structure. The refusals are child care center and assembly and entertainment uses are prohibited
in the RSA 5 zoning area or zoning district, and multiple principal uses are prohibited
in the RSA 5 zoning district we have a letter of support from the new 42nd ward RCO with a proviso
limiting their support to the child care center use only we also have a letter of non-opposition
from council member Lozada so uh Mr. Snell yes sorry I just wanted to interject to note that
we've received an amended refusal on this case that adds two additional uses to the property
one an educational facility and two personal services for a boys and girls club that personal
that personal services use generated one additional use refusal on this application.
services use generated one additional use refusal on the
Gotcha. Okay. Okay. All right. So you want me to read that out, Hillary? I see it here on the
applicant now request. Is it how many uses, Hillary? They have listed here. Four uses.
Four uses. Okay. That's child care center, which is on the second floor, educational facility on
the third personal services that's the uh boys and girls club on the first floor and assembly
and entertainment which is also on the first floor um okay so uh the educational facility
use was previously approved at the location so uh we're going to vote on this uh i'm going to vote
yes with proviso per amended refusal dated March 22nd, 2024. Temporary variance for all uses expiring
April 30th, 2026. My vote is yes with proviso. Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes with proviso.
LeBaron Leonard Palmer, my vote is yes with proviso. Thank you, Jim. Thank you. Number two,
MI 2024, 000149, 2350 East Albert Street, I vote no.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is no.
James Snell, my vote is no.
Number three, MI 2024, 000227, 100018 West Sedgley Street, I vote yes.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes
James Snell, my vote is yes
Number four, MI 2024, 000276, 1020-30 West Sedgley Street, I vote yes
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes
James Snell, my vote is yes
Okay, we're going to go to our regular list
And we're going to start with number four, MI 2024-000-108-2448 Kensington Avenue.
Jarrett Klein is the attorney.
There's a recommendation of non-opposition from the East Kensington Neighborhood Association.
And there's also a letter of non-opposition from Council Member Lozada.
Mr. Klein.
Good afternoon, Mr. Chair, members of the board.
Mr. Klein, could you state your name and then spell it, please, for the court's sonographer?
Certainly. It is Jared, J-A-R-E-D, last name Klein, K-L-E-I-N, from Notcomson, PC, 1 South Broad Street.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Could you identify your client in relationship to this property?
Certainly. My client is Vu Lee, who is the owner of the property and joining us today online.
Okay, and Mr. Holloman has a few questions for you.
Good afternoon, counsel.
Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to his accuracy?
Yes, I do.
Did you email all of the exhibits and documents as required five days in advance to this hearing?
I did.
Thank you.
Please proceed and share your screen.
Thank you.
Is that visible for the board?
We can.
So we're here for 2448 Kensington Avenue, and this on the cover page before you is a rendering of what we hope the completed project will look like.
The refusal that we received is for both use and the dimensional requirements of the code.
We're zoned CMX2 because we're along the Kensington Avenue commercial corridor.
And so the maximum number of dwelling units would be two. We are seeking use as a triplex
while also maintaining the commercial space requirement on the first floor. So we are
offering the ground floor commercial as required by code, but we're seeking an additional residential
unit. And then there's a 75 percent maximum occupancy and we're at 983 square feet and the
code would limit us at 863 square feet. As I'll show you as we go through, we're matching pretty
closely the existing structures around us and the lot size we think justifies the variance that
we're seeking. Just for context, these are other properties in the immediate area that have been
approved by the board for multifamily. This is 2464. Kensington was approved for four units.
This is 2464 Kensington was approved for four units and 2440 Kensington was approved for 10 units.
So there is documentation of other uses in the area.
Similarly, we've created a map of other nearby similarly zoned properties that also exceed the 75% lot coverage.
Those are the properties that are highlighted in red on this map.
this is our property here. So as the board can see, the 75% lot coverage has been exceeded on
all the properties next to us on both sides of the street and all along Kensington Avenue.
To contextualize this for the board, this is our lot here.
And some pictures of the street. This is the existing lot as it stands right now.
It is a vacant lot. It's overgrown and has existed in this condition for some time.
Photograph of our posting notice on the front of the building.
And these are some shots of Kensington Avenue.
We know the board is very familiar with this.
But just to give context to the surrounding area, we are right under the L and on the commercial corridor,
which is why we think the additional one unit of density is appropriate trying to drive traffic to
that existing commercial corridor. You've seen this photo already but this is a rendering of
what the building would look like upon completion and zoning site plan showing how we're fitting in
with the other buildings adjacent to us. Important to note that we do have a three-foot alley behind
us that runs on a diagonal, and that creates a condition where we're losing a certain amount
of square footage from the rear yard area. If we were to box this out and capture what the square
footage would be if it had remained a rectangle, we're pretty close to meeting that open area
requirement by right. So the refusal is really being driven by this diagonal line that runs
along the back of the property that takes away that square footage. These are existing
Bringing perspective shots to the left and right of where the building would be, and then elevations to show us in context with the completed structure.
We also have the side. We do have a pilot house that is set back appropriately on both sides, and we're height compliant as well.
And floor plans that show the three proposed units with roof deck space.
um we did meet uh with the RCO I believe I heard the chair summarizing it as I came in
uh it was a low attended meeting though it was a very sufficiently advertised but all three
attendees were in support of the project uh and then there was also a letter uh from Councilman
Councilwoman Lozada's office uh also in non-opposition um with that I would like to
have Vu Li raise their hand and briefly adopt my testimony if they're online.
Vu Li has been allowed to speak.
Mike, could you please state your name and spell for the court stenographer?
Hi, can you hear me?
Yes, I can.
Hi, my name is Vu Li.
First name is V.S. Victor Yu.
Last name is L.E.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Please proceed, counsel.
Thank you.
Vu, did you have a chance to hear my statements this afternoon?
And do you adopt them as true, correct, and your own if you've been given a longer chance to testify?
Great.
We don't have anything further, Mr. Chair, but are happy to answer any questions.
Questions from the board?
No, Mr. Chairman.
No, Chair.
Questions or comments from our attorney, Hillary Emerson?
Not at this time, Mr. Chair.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
Chair, we have a Lorraine Mueller with your hand raised.
They have been allowed to speak.
Hi, could you state your name, please, and spell for the court stenographer?
Lorraine?
Hi, yes, my name is Lori Mueller, and I'm interested.
Hold on a minute.
Could you spell your name, please, for the court reporter?
okay well i'll give you my full first name lorraine l-o-r-r-a-i-n-e mueller is m-u-e-double-l-e-r
right do you swear or firm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth
i do are you a neighbor yes okay please proceed okay is this in regards to the friary
that's a zoning meeting that i wanted to attend which one was that ma'am
Okay, on the Academy Road by Archie.
Okay, on Academy Road by...
No, no, no, ma'am, this is Kendigdon Abner.
No, no, no, ma'am. This is Kendigdon Avenue.
Okay, well, when are you going to come to that one?
This was the information.
Well, I'll get to that shortly. Thank you.
Is there anyone else in the virtual audience?
No hands, Chair.
Planning Commission.
I'm sorry, Chair. We did just have a hand.
And Therese Ford, they have been allowed to speak.
Hi, could you please state your name and spell for the court stenographer?
okay can you hear me now yes yes could you please state your name and spell for the court
artrice ford a-r-t-r-i-c-e last name ford f-o-r-d you swear or firm to tell the truth
the whole truth nothing wait a minute wait a minute wait a minute why i'm state why what's
all this no i'm here for a zoom meeting this is a zoom meeting ma'am it's about kensington avenue
oh no this i was informed this is on winsome street no it's not ma'am it's not uh and just
to reiterate for the record the winsome street case has been continued okay thank you um is
there anyone else in the virtual audience there are no hands cleaning commission
Thank you, Chair Bergman, Sarah Bond, S-A-R-A-H-B-A-N-H.
Right. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Please proceed.
Thank you, sir. The comprehensive plan recommends no change to the existing commercial mixed-use zoning.
The dimensional requirements of the zoning code do not create an economic detriment for the appellant.
Additionally, the appellant has not shown that the property cannot possibly be used in strict conformity with the zoning code and that a variance is therefore necessary to enable the viable economic use of the property.
The appellant chose not to take advantage of the mixed income housing bonus that would have allowed for an additional unit.
The City Planning Commission recommends that the zoning board deny the use and dimensional variances.
Thank you.
So MI 2024-000-108-2448 Kensington Avenue, I vote yes with a proviso. Use registration required prior to occupancy for vacant commercial space.
Thomas Holliman, my vote is yes with proviso.
James Snell, my vote is yes with proviso.
Counsel, could you stay on for number six?
Certainly.
So MI 2024-000-311-1715-R-McKean Street.
Mr. Klein is the counsel.
There's a recommendation of support from the East Point Breeze neighbors.
Mr. Klein, could you, just for the record, state your name?
Certainly.
Jared Klein from Knockamson, PC, on behalf of the tenant.
Right.
Could you identify your client, a relationship to this property?
Certainly. My client is Holly Danessi.
She's joining me online today, and she is the tenant for the subject space.
And Mr. Holloman has a few questions, sir.
Good afternoon, counsel.
Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to his accuracy?
Yes, I do.
Did you email all the exhibits and documents as required five days in advance to this hearing?
I did.
Thank you. Please proceed and share your screen.
Thank you, Mr. Holloman.
So we are now here for 1715 R McCain Street, and the application before you is for body art services, essentially a very high end tattoo artists space.
Just to give the board some context before I get into the majority of the of the presentation, Holly's is really a tattoo artist.
She does not do sort of the South Street style walk in and get a tattoo.
She is a by appointment only artist who really the best way I can describe what she does
is she's an artist, but her canvas is human skin as opposed to paper or or other other
materials.
And so it's important to keep that in mind as I go through the presentation.
The parcel that we have is zoned I-2.
and body art services is unfortunately prohibited in that space. The property at 1715 R McKean
is interesting. This is our lot here. There's a front portion of the building that fronts onto
McKean Street, an open courtyard that then leads back to this larger R parcel. And I've got some
other photos that will articulate it better for the board. You can see here 1715 McKean is this
You can see here, 1715 McKean is this space here.
space here. The R.
The R parcel picks up after you go through this small opening.
There's a courtyard and then a building behind that is now being proposed for a variety of uses.
And the board actually, I believe, has applications for this address for the next three weeks as different tenants are coming into this space.
This is the building here.
and to give a better sense of this courtyard this is the it's it's the old um abbott's dairy
building and so you've got 1715 front here there's a dog daycare that's in this front portion of the
space and then this open courtyard that goes back to the entrance to the r building back here and
what's proposed is for one of the spaces within the r building to become the body art studio this
is just another picture looking from the back of that little area out towards McKean Street.
Photograph of our posting and photographs of McKean Street as you look to the right and left
of the property. Right now, the space, it used to be home to a cabinet manufacturing business.
The owners of the building manufacture the cabinets. They're in the process of moving
their manufacturing facility elsewhere and then renting the space out. So it's a very raw space
right now. The plan is that this is going to be partitioned off and will become the tattoo studio
if the board allows us to proceed. This is the floor plan of the space. You can see the entrance
off the lobby here. It's a small space. There's a drawing area, a tattooing area with a sink
and a bathroom. It's a very intimate artist space. It's not a large tattoo shop that's going to have
lots of customers queuing up, waiting in line, things like that. She may have other artists who
will join her here, but they're open by appointment only. There will be no walk-in service, so you'll
have to make an appointment through her to be able to visit the space. And so that really addresses
any concern about loitering or other crowd control-based issues for the parcel.
As the chair mentioned, we did meet with the RCO, and we have a letter of support here in the file.
Everybody who attended, including the near neighbors, was in support of the application.
They believe that the I-2 zoning of the lot creates its own hardship as applied to this
because of the zoning around it.
As you can see, everything else around the building is RM1.
So having the requirement that a buy right I-2 use go in here would be more disruptive
for the neighbors than a buy appointment only tattoo parlor.
And just to give the board a sense of Holly's work, before I ask her to adopt my testimony,
these are samples of some of her artwork taken off of her website.
As you can see, these are very detailed tattoos that really have a lot of fine line and artistry to them.
Holly, if you are in the virtual audience, can you raise your hands that you might adopt my testimony?
Thank you.
Holly, you're allowed to speak.
Hi, could you state your name, please, and spell for the court, sonographer?
Good afternoon.
My name is Holly Danese, H-O-L-L-Y-D-A-N-E-S-I.
You swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Please proceed, counsel.
Thank you.
Holly, did you have a chance to hear my presentation this afternoon?
And do you adopt my statements as true and correct in your own if you've been given a longer chance to speak?
yes great uh questions from the board no mr chairman questions or comments more attorney
hillary emberson just briefly mr klein i just wanted to verify that the this this use is
proposed for suite 204 did i read that correctly yes all right thank you and i i did i have seen
some other things come in with other properties so i do want to make sure we distinguish
or other suites in this property.
Right, there's another larger application
of Borgal here about a brewery
that's going into the ground floor.
Yes, yes.
Okay, thank you.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
I see no hands.
Planning Commission.
Thank you, Chair Bergman, Sarah Bond
for the Philadelphia City Planning Commission.
The comprehensive plan recommends a zoning map change
to industrial mixed use under the recommended zoning the proposed use would be a special exception
the proposed use will not cause detrimental impacts to the neighborhood beyond what might normally be expected
The proposed use will not cause detrimental impacts to the neighborhood beyond what might normally be expected.
Therefore, the City Planning Commission recommends that the Zoning Board grant the variance.
MI 2024-000-311-1715R McKean Street, I vote yes, with proviso, use limited to Suite 204.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes, with proviso.
So, James Snell, my vote is yes with proviso.
Thank you.
Thank you, counsel.
Number two, MI 2023-002-231-3030 North 20th Street.
Peter Kelson is the attorney.
There's a letter of support from Allegheny West Civic Association.
CDR was required and completed.
Peter Kelsen is coming in as a panelist.
Good afternoon, Mr. Kelsen.
Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman, members of the board.
Peter Kelsen on behalf of New Cortland Properties for the subject property.
Just for the record, Mr. Kelsen, could you spell your name so that...
Of course. It's Peter, P-E-T-E-R, Kelsen, K-E-L-S-E-M.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
And your client, again, could you identify your client one more time?
Is New Cortland Properties.
Okay. And Mr. Holloman has a few questions, sir.
Absolutely.
Mr. Chair. Good afternoon, counsel. Good afternoon. Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to his accuracy?
I do, with one exception, Mr. Holliman. We are not including any commercial use as part of this appeal and application.
That's part of our proviso plan and correspondence I've had with the board previously.
So everything else on the refusal I stipulate to, but because there will be no commercial use and that was part of the refusal, it's really a moot point at this point.
Thank you.
Did you email all the exhibits and documents as required five days in advance to this hearing?
I did, yes.
please proceed and share your screen
I'd like to promote
Mr. Martin Grigorski
who's going to help me share the screen if I could
okay sure
they have been promoted to panelists
thank you so much
thank you
Mr. Chairman, members of the board, the subject property, let's go to the refusal if we could.
Subject property is zoned I-1 industrial.
If you look at the site photographs that are contained in your package, Marty, let's go to the overhead, please.
You will note that this site is vacant. It has been vacant since 1980. Subject property was acquired by the Redevelopment Authority via condemnation, and we are working with the Redevelopment Authority as a redeveloper to develop this site, as I'll mention in a few moments.
The site is fairly large. It contains about 53,600 square feet of lot area.
And if you look at the zoning map that's part of the package, you'll see that the property is really surrounded by mixed zoning.
There is industrial. Most of that is vacant, but there is some active industrial.
And directly adjacent on two sides of the property, we have at 21st Street, across 21st Street, residential, RSA 5, and across Toronto as well, RSA 5.
The application before you members of the board is to create a brand new four-story building containing a total of 48 new residential units that will be utilized for senior affordable housing.
Again, we're working with the Philadelphia Redevelopment Authority on this project.
Again, we're working with the Philadelphia Redevelopment Authority on this project.
The site will contain 33 parking spaces.
Units will be one bedroom.
Six of the units will be fully accessible located on the first level.
Two will be accessible for the visually impaired.
The balance will be adaptable and visitable.
The unit sizes will range from approximately 600 square feet to about 670 square feet.
The project will be supported at a 50 percent AMI level, average medium income, supported by low income housing tax credits, as well as rent subsidies as part of the affordability component.
We will provide a community room, community kitchen as well. Trash will be stored inside the building internally. I would have the board note, and Marty, maybe we can put the renderings up if we could, that the building has been oriented in terms of its main entrance to basically abut the residential buildings that exist across Toronto Street.
So it's welcome. And it's it's enlivening the streetscape and residential meets residential, which we felt is very important.
As I indicated earlier, and I have guaranteed the PRA, I would say this multiple times, there will be no commercial use located at this property.
And if there is commercial use, it will be a separate application to the board.
And again, our proviso plan notes that that has been withdrawn from the application.
As the chair indicated, we had meetings with Allegheny West.
They are supportive of the application.
Design review was completed.
The hardship to the property members of the board is pretty obvious.
There is no viable industrial use in this area, certainly not for this site.
This application will remove and remediate blight.
It will activate the area and also create an essential affordable housing component to the community, especially for seniors.
It will allow a viable reuse of this vacant lot, which, as I said to you earlier, has been vacant since 1980, in accordance with not only the urban renewal plan for the area, but also in accordance with the Planning Commission's comprehensive plan.
If the board has any questions, our architect is in the room, the developers, representatives are in the room, and we'd be happy to answer any you may have.
Thank you.
Mr. Kelsey, you want to bring someone on that would adopt your testimony that developed the baby?
Mr. Unger, if you're available, could you please raise your hand?
John Unger has been allowed to speak.
Mr. Unger, could you state your name, please, and spell for the stenographer?
John Unger, J-O-H-N-U-N-G-A-R.
Right. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Please proceed, counsel.
Thank you. Mr. Unger, are you affiliated with New Cortland?
Yes, I am. I'm the Corporate Counsel and Director of Planning for New Cortland.
Thank you. And you heard the statements that I've given the zoning board a few moments ago. Is that correct?
Yes, I did.
Did you hear all of the presentation that I made?
Yes, I heard the entire presentation.
Would you adopt that presentation as your own and make it your testimony?
Yes, I do.
And you affirm that testimony as well, correct?
Yes, I do.
I thank you very much.
All right.
Questions from the board?
No, Mr. Chairman.
No, Chair.
Questions or comments from our attorney, Hillary Emerson?
i just wanted to excuse me clarify a couple quick things because on the on the original
refusal said there there would be two structures erected now only one structure is proposed um
but all of the the 33 parking spaces are still there right and um is there still an off-street
loading space or is that for the the proposed commercial use that's now no longer there
That is no longer there. So you are correct, Hillary, that the 33 spaces are available and will be supportive of the residential. And there is no commercial. And I think that's answering your questions.
I think that's answering your questions.
Yes. No, thank you very much.
No, thank you very much.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
Chair, we have Charles Richardson with a hand raised.
They have been allowed to speak.
Good afternoon, Mr. Richardson.
Could you state your name, please, and spell for the stenographer?
Good afternoon, Mr. Chair.
Charles Richardson, R-I-C-H-A-R-D-S-O-N, Office of Councilwoman Cindy Bass, room 508 City Hall.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Please proceed.
The Councilwoman is very supportive of the granting of this variance.
Thank you for your time and call this.
Is there anyone else in the verse audience?
The number ending in 3552 has been allowed to speak.
Could you please state your name and spell for the stenographer?
This is Adrienne Fernandez.
Can you hear me okay?
Yeah, I can.
Adrian, spell your name for the stenographer, please.
My last name is spelled F-E-R-N-A-N-D-E-Z.
Right.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Please proceed.
Our letter of support was sent in late.
We support this project, and we just have four provisos that I want to read into record.
Okay. The first one is that all trash, recycling, and dumpsters be stored within the property lines and not on the sidewalks or the public right-of-ways.
And the second one is that all planters suggested by CDR, raised or otherwise, are placed within the property lines.
And the third one is that all bike parking suggested by the CDR is placed within the property lines.
And the last one is that no rooftop deck structures for occupancies for mechanical use only.
Thank you.
Mr. Chairman, may I just make a clarification?
There will not be any bicycle parking provided.
However, in the event that there is bicycle parking, everything will be internally positioned within the lot.
And all of those provisors are acceptable.
We did commit to internal trash storage, et cetera.
So, okay.
Thank you.
Anyone else in the virtual audience?
I see no hands.
Planning Commission.
Thank you, Chair Bergman, Sarah Bond, Philadelphia City Planning Commission.
The comprehensive plan recommends no change to the existing industrial zoning.
However, the plan includes recommendations to advance the promotion of housing, job opportunities, and the revitalization of vacant spaces.
The proposal conforms to this comprehensive plan recommendation.
Additionally, the PCPC has provided a community planning certification form affirming the proposal's consistency with the North District plan.
Therefore, the City Planning Commission recommends that the Zoning Board grant the variance.
Thank you.
Mr. Kelson, before I start, how many in the revised plans, how many pages?
We had four, but Hillary has a question next to it.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Yes.
No problem. Let us go through it very carefully. Marty, if you could go back.
So this is the revised zoning site plan.
The other plans are illustrative elevations.
I don't believe they need to be stamped by the board.
Um, but the total, so I would say the total number would be one, Mr. Chairman, make it
easier for L and I, um, Hillary, are you okay with that?
Yeah, no, that would, that, that would be great.
That would be great.
If there's no dimensional changes, just removals of things in the site plan is, is fine.
Thank you.
Just want to make it easier for everybody.
Thanks.
So we appreciate that.
MI 2023 002 231 3030 North 20th Street. I vote yes with proviso. Revised plan one page
stamped by ZBA April 10th, 2024. Approved use is a multifamily household living only.
No commercial use is approved. Trash to be stored internally and planters also be to be
stored in property line. Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes with provisos.
James Snell, my vote is yes with provisos. Thank you, sir. We appreciate it.
Thanks so much, members of the board. Appreciate it.
Number three, MI 2023-007-278-220 Geiger Road. Stephen Pollack is the attorney.
220 Geiger Road. Stephen Pollack is the attorney. Letter of non-opposition from
Council Member O'Neill. Recommendation of support from the Greater Busselton Civic Association.
Vote was unanimous.
Stephen Pollack is coming in as panelist.
All right, I think I clicked on it.
Good afternoon, Mr. Pollock. Could you state your name, please, and spell for the stenographer?
Good afternoon, Chairman Bergman, members of the board, Stephen Pollock, S-T-E-P-H-E-N, Pollock, P-O-L-L-O-C-K.
I am the zoning attorney for Flatiron Supports, which is a tenant of the building at 220 Geiger Road.
All right. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
I do, sir.
Mr. Holloman has a few questions.
good afternoon counsel do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to his
accuracy i do mr holliman did you email all the exhibits and documents as required five days in
advance to this hearing yes we did thank you please proceed and share your screen okay mr
chairman may i uh have my associate ryan thomas elevated so he can share the screen absolutely yep
kelson and i are old guys we have other people help us
hopefully ryan you're getting there i see him
while we're waiting this is an application for a an adult training facility that's been on the
premises since 2010, but another space became available, space 101, up at the front of the
building. And this is our exhibit A2 in our packet. We have exhibits A1 through A21. A10
has photos 1 through 41, and I'll ask that everything be included and accepted into the
record so we're going to we're in 104 105 and we also would like to now have it this additional
space at 101 up front go to the next screen which is our a3 just to show you it's it's a
do you have the front portion there it is in yellow it's it's the wider space now let's go
to the next slide which is um our mission statement as an adult training facility
Really, what they do is it's a defined term, actually, in the 55 PA code 2380.
It provides fundamental functional activities, assistance in meeting personal needs, and assistance in performing basic daily activities.
These are physically impaired individuals.
I have with me Mr. Sean Charlton, who is the CEO of Flatiron Supports.
This is their mission statement that's actually on the website, and it goes into that Sean and his father, Matt, started this because their brother and son, Danny, had some disabilities,
and they didn't think the current core of facilities weren't providing what they needed.
Back in 2010, or 2009, 2007, in fact, they started this. In 2010, they came to this facility, and we have that variance at A9. There was a variance granted by the board because this property is in an industrial district.
It was in an old G2 industrial, now in an I2 industrial, which doesn't allow for personal services.
However, the building has been used by them at 104, and then in 2017, I represented them at A7.
We came in to expand from 104 into 105 to have a merged facility.
Now, this facility came available at 101, which previously was zoned for a church, and we have that at A8 of our exhibit package, the prior counseling facility for church.
So, what's happened in this building over the years, Chairman and members of the board, is it's never been used for an industrial purpose.
It's been allowed to evolve into these different uses.
can you show let's show a couple of the photos real quick or wait before you get to that show
the certificate of compliance by the state this is at our our eighth a five that shows that we are
an adult training facility with a capacity of 34 so that's that's what we're allowed to by the
So that's what we're allowed to by the state. So we won't be, by having this other location in the unit, we won't be expanding the number of people that we can serve, just that the state allows us to go up to 34.
state so we won't be but by having this other location
And as I said, it's an actual defined term in the PA code and provides really self-care, communication, gives them physical education, gives their clientele, takes them on trips to the mall to get them used to commerce and retail and provides necessary skills.
They arrive there by either paratransit or their parents bring them to and from the facility.
We are open five days a week only from about 7 to 3.30.
There are no weekend trips or visits.
And the people bring their own meals.
But we have computers.
We have a lot of different things to challenge them and teach them certain skills.
So let's just show the picture real quick of what the property looks like.
Ryan, if you can go to our A-10, we have various photos.
And we had, as I said, this is the front of the building off Geiger Road.
Keep going.
This is where Unit 101 is, right in the front.
There we go.
And they'll be coming in under that awning for this location, for that space.
And then the building goes all the way back towards the rear. This is another side view as we're headed towards the right-hand side. And we keep going. And the building has many other uses in the back. Some of it's a gym. Some of it's, I think, not retail, but office space and that kind of stuff.
to our, go ahead, and now to our immediate left, and I provided the zoning variance that was
granted at A19 for the building 240 Geiger Road, and I was the attorney in 1999 that got Dr.
Bressler and Dr. Bressler's cavity busters permission through a variance granted by the
board to allow the adjacent, entire adjacent building at 240 Geiger Road to be converted
into a dental office.
Mr. Powell, can I ask one question?
So in 2008, the zoning board did 101.
Is this a different use?
Well, they did 101 as a church, not as a...
Okay, so now it's a different use.
This is a different use.
Okay, fine.
Okay, thank you.
We're this adult training facility.
Thank you, sir.
So that's why we wanted to be sure that we were okay.
Apparently, the state is okay with them
because as long as it's in that same building, 220, the state is okay with their licensing.
So with that, Mr. Chairman, as I said, I'd like to bring on Sean Charlton.
And as noted, we did have a big attendance at our meeting before the greater bustle.
We had 32 people, and all 32 said they were in support.
And you have a letter of no objection from Councilman O'Neill.
Sean, are you up? Did you raise your hand and enter?
Sean, I'm not allowed to speak.
Hi, sir.
Could you please state your name and spell for the stenographer?
It's Sean Trollton, S-E-A-N, last name C-H-A-R-L-T-O-N.
You swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Yes, sir.
Proceed, counsel.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Sean, you and your father started this back in 2007, as we related, and you've been at
this location about since 2009, 2010.
at 220 Geiger Road in different units. Is that correct? That's correct. And Sean, you've heard
what I stated on the record. Did you listen to my entire presentation? Yes, I did. And what I say,
do you think that was true and correct? Do you believe it was true and correct? Yes, I do.
And do you adopt that as your testimony today as if it had to come out of your own mouth today
as we stand here.
Yes, I do.
With that, Mr. Chairman,
we believe this is the least minimum variance
to afford relief
because we're just taking over an existing space,
not expanding the building,
and therefore we ask for your support.
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 see no hands.
Planning Commission.
Thank you, Chair Bergman.
Sarah Bond with the Philadelphia City Planning Commission.
The comprehensive plan recommends no change to the existing industrial zoning.
The proposed use of personal services, specifically adult training facility, is consistent with nearby properties.
The City Planning Commission recommends that the zoning board grant the variance.
The City Planning Commission recommends that the Zoning Board grant the variance.
Thank you.
Thank you.
MI 2020.
MI 2023-007-278-220 Geiger Road.
I vote yes with proviso.
Use limited to space 101.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes with proviso.
May I say we're still in 104-105 for spaces, but this new use would be limited to 101.
That's what I'm saying, right.
All right.
All right. James Snell, my vote is yes for Proviso.
Thank you, counsel. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, members of the board. Have a great day.
Okay. Number five, MI 2024-000163-726 Wesley High Avenue. Alan Nockamson is the attorney.
There's a recommendation to support from the 37 Ward RCO. Vote was 23 in support, unanimous.
The applicant also provided a petition in support signed by 28 neighbors, along with two letters from Lineage Property Management.
Mr. Nocklinson, you were sworn once today. Could you just state your name for the record, please?
Alan Nocklinson.
And could you identify your client and their relationship to this property?
Yes, it's 726 W. Lehigh LLC, the owner of the property, and in the virtual audience is its member, Robert Nunez.
And Mr. Holloman has just a few questions, sir.
Good afternoon, counsel. Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Did you email all the exhibits and documents as required five days in advance of this hearing?
Yes, we have.
Thank you. Please proceed and share your screen.
All right. So we're here to present 726 West Lehigh Avenue.
During our presentation, we'll first review the notice of refusal.
So this is a CMX 2 property, although it looks nothing like a CMX 2 property.
I would equate it more to an RM 1 property, and you'll see what I mean when I show pictures of the property.
But, you know, we have three refusals here and we'll go over the refusals.
But essentially, we're trying to swap out the commercial unit with residential and have a total of five units where there's a history of five units for this building.
In addition, we're essentially extending a nonconforming use in the backyard, which is creating a dimensional refusal for rear yard setback.
But again, it's already a nonconforming building.
But we'll go over that when we review the refusal.
Then we'll review the letter of support from the 37th Ward Executive Democratic Committee.
That was a very well attended meeting.
23 people voted and 23 people voted in support.
So it's not often that you have a room that large where everyone's in support or something.
But we also have a petition as well that my client did.
He canvassed the neighborhood and we have extensive support by way of a petition and
letters of support.
Then you'll see the property history where this has been a five-unit building at one point.
So what we're seeking, it's not out of character.
It fits within not only the fabric of the neighborhood, but it's consistent with its previous use at one point.
Then maps of the area, photographs of the property, our plans and drawings,
our RCO meeting notice and proof of mailing that notice to the affected properties within a 250-square-foot radius,
our application for appeal that we filed on behalf of 726 W. Lehigh LLC,
along with the deed showing that they own the property and the certificate of tax clearance showing that no real estate taxes are owed through the date of today's hearing.
At the conclusion of my presentation, I would ask that Mr. Nunez virtually raise his hand, be sworn in, and then I'll ask him essentially to adopt my testimony as his own.
Notice refusal, again, CMX2 property here.
What we're looking to do is keep the existing building structure in the rear.
there's like a like an extension to it it's dilapidated it needs to be replaced we're
demolishing that small portion of it that extends out which is the non-conforming part of the lot
and then we're building rebuilding that and then extending out in the back as well
and you know that's the first that's one of the refusals and then the other two refusals just
have to do with the fact that we're not putting commercial use on the ground floor on the ground
floor. Again, you'll see from the photographs of this property, this property does not look
like a CMX2 property. It looks like a multifamily property, but not a CMX2 property. There's no
storefront there, and it would be very expensive to reconfigure the property that way, and it
to reconfigure the property that way. And it has character to its history as well. And then
have character to its history.
the unit count too, given the size of a lot, we're running afoul the Philadelphia zoning code.
But again, there has been a history of five unit use in the past, and we don't think that that's
out of character. And it's more of a de minimis request on our part. Letter of support, again,
23 people voted in favor of this project.
Again, my client's a well-known quantity in this neighborhood does great housing, affordable housing.
And by adding this additional unit, it's going to keep it at more of an affordable rate as well.
Petition, again, because we're so well-known, was able to easily canvass the neighborhood and get extreme support from surrounding property owners.
and then he does he does do affordable housing here and you know this is a letter from one of
those providers that's in the community that he's worked with in the past that was complementary of
the services he provided with his housing and so you know showing that as well that's why he has
such a great reputation in the neighborhood and then property history again this used to be a
five-family dwelling at one point. Maps to the area. Again, we are CMX2. We're surrounded by
RM1 on our side of the street. And we are in Lehigh, but this is not a commercial property.
This is what our property looks like. This is not a storefront that you would see on the CMX2
property. So this property is clearly mislabeled. In order for us to have a commercial component
here, we would have to expend an extensive amount of money that really we need to dedicate to the
back, which is having, you know, issues. And that's why we're demolishing the rear portion
of the property, the non-conforming portion, and it building upward. But there's, you know,
it's just complete gut job. And you'll see from our rendering what we want to do with this property,
which would not be possible if we had to have a commercial component on the ground floor.
Proof of posting for today's hearing. The rear of the property showing, again, not a very large backyard, but we wanted to show, that was asked of us, and obviously we want to embrace the fact that this is a non-conforming building structure, and then you can see it from a more higher point of view, you can see how we jet out as well, and then it's a different angle as well.
But again, not out of character.
There are other building structures that kind of jet out similarly.
And then this is Lehigh from the left and right of the property.
And then this additional, by the way, this additional residential use will help support that commercial order that does exist there.
We just don't feel like it's appropriate for us to be forced to essentially convert our building structure to commercial use where it's never been used that way.
And more importantly, how it's configured right now would be very expensive to reconfigure it to commercial use.
So this is what we're looking to do here. Again, clean up the brickwork, you know, get, you know, focus on the lentils and the cornice lines and just do a complete renovation of this property inside and out.
And then we met on March 19th at 6 p.m. Again, very well attended meeting. The notice was emailed a few weeks before the meeting to the affected RCOs, as well as the district council member zoning aid.
And 139 addresses were mailed that notice.
These are the addresses and proof of mailing to those addresses.
Our application for appeal that we filed on behalf of 726 W. Lehigh LLC, along with the notice of refusal and the project information form, our deed to the property showing that 726 W. Lehigh LLC is the owner of the property, and finally, the Certificate of Tax Clearance.
With that being said, I would ask that.
Mr. Nockamson, real quick, did you show where the apartments go?
Oh, yeah, sure.
I don't remember seeing that.
I'm just curious.
Yeah, let's see.
All right, so you walk into a common vegetable area, right?
We have unit number one, which is the ground floor, and then there's a lower level.
That's a bi-level unit.
That's a two-bedge and one-bath.
You go up a flight of steps, and there's basically two units on the other floor.
You go to the right.
You have unit number two, which is a studio and one-bath, and unit number three, which
is also a studio and one-bath, and then unit four and five are also a studio and one-bath.
And then unit four and five are also studio and one bats.
All right.
My client, again, deals with, you know, the affordable housing that he deals with.
And I know that the planning commission is going to say just do the affordable housing bonus.
But like, you know, this is his business model.
And the reason why he needs the configuration he has is that usually the people that he rents to are single individuals who are looking to restart their lives in a way.
And it's been a very successful program that he has because a lot of those individuals get back on their feet and then they become tenants in other properties he has.
He does have a two-bedroom one for someone who may have a couple, who may have a kid, who need to get back on their feet.
But that's his business model.
You want to bring him on, adopt your testimony?
Mr. Nunez?
Robert.
Nunez has been allowed to speak. Sir, could you please state your name and spell for the stenographer?
Please unmute yourself, Robert.
Sorry, is that better? Hi, could you state your name please and spell for the stenographer?
Yes, Robert Nunez, R-O-B-E-R-T-I-N-N-U-N-E-Z.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Please proceed, counsel.
Yes, Mr. Nunez, have you heard everything I had to say today about your zoning matter?
And is it true and correct?
And do you adopt it as your own testimony?
All right, thank you.
Questions from the board?
No, Mr. Chairman.
No, Chair.
Questions or comments from our attorney, Hillary Emerson?
Hi, Mr. Chair.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
Yes, Chair.
We have Andrew.
They haven't allowed to speak.
Could you please state your name and spell for the stenographer?
My name is Andrew, A-N-D-R-E-W.
My last name is E-F-I-M-O-V.
Right.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Yes, sir.
Are you a neighbor?
Are you a neighbor?
Yes, I am.
Please proceed.
I just wanted to give all the support to the projects in that area, especially with the development team like Robert.
I think he does a fantastic job.
He creates new transition homes for the people that are in need.
It clearly, you can clearly see that by the community support.
I think it's a fantastic project.
I think the development team behind it is amazing.
And I wish him nothing but the best.
And hopefully you will give him support.
Thank you.
Thank you for taking the time to close.
We appreciate it.
Is there anyone else in the virtual audience?
Yes, we have Dimitri.
They haven't allowed to speak.
Hi, sir.
Could you please state your name and spell for the sonographer?
Dimitri?
Dimitri, please unmute yourself.
Dimitri?
Sorry, Chair, it seems like they're not.
Is there anyone else?
There are no other hands.
Thank you.
Planning Commission.
Thank you, Chair Bergman.
Sarah Bond with the Philadelphia City Planning Commission.
The comprehensive plan recommends a zoning map
change to multifamily residential at this location. The proposed dwelling unit count is in keeping
with permits granted to properties on this block face. Not providing ground floor commercial is in
use in or rather is in alignment with recommended remapping to residential multifamily adjacent
properties and the structure of the existing building. The City Planning Commission recommends
that the Zoning Board grant the variances for no ground floor commercial, reduced rear yard setback
and for lot area per dwelling unit.
Thank you.
MI 2024-000163-726 Wesley Eye Avenue.
I vote yes.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes.
James Snell, my vote is yes.
Mr. Nockamson, could you stay on, please?
We're going to MI 2024.
I'm sorry, I didn't mean to interrupt.
MI 2024-000-313-1610 West Tioga Street.
Mr. Nockamson is the attorney.
There's a letter of support from Nicetown Tioga Improvement Team with unenforceable provisos.
Could you identify your client, Mr. Nockamson, and the relationship to the property?
Could you identify your client, Mr. Nockmson, and the relationship to the property?
So I was going to say, I'm going to defer to Mr. Goldberg.
Oh, okay, sure.
I figured it would be a team effort today.
Okay, good.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you for your time.
This is your third team member today.
That's what I'm saying.
We're doing the whole parlay here.
All right.
Mr. Goldberg.
Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman.
Hi, could you state your name, please, for the record and spell it for the stenographer?
Alex Goldberg, A-L-E-X-G-O-L-D-B-E-R-G.
Do you swear for him to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Could you identify your client or relationship to the property?
Yes, my client is Ruth Davidson and Cheryl Tyler, the owners of the property.
Mr. Holloman has just a few questions.
Good afternoon, counsel.
Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to his accuracy?
Did you email all the exhibits and documents as required five days in advance to this hearing?
I did.
Thank you. Please proceed and share your screen.
Okay. Mr. Chairman, can you see my screen?
I can.
Great.
Great. Again, my name is Alex Goldberg of Knockamson, PC. Ruth Davidson is the record
owner of 1610 West Tioga Street. Her daughter, Cheryl Tyler, is going to be representing
Ms. Davidson, and I'll ask her to adopt my testimony at the end of my presentation.
The property address is 1610 West Tioga, and really the gist of this zoning appeal
is to cure a life and safety issue that was created by no fault of my client.
As you'll see in the architectural materials, we are seeking to modify an exterior entrance to the
basement at the side of the property, which was originally created by contractors who since
abandoned the project several years ago. That structure extended to the lot line on the side
of the property, essentially leaving no path of egress from the rear of the property. And
essentially, we're seeking to squeeze that rear egress, make it more rectangular, and open up a
window of space to exit the rear of the property and access the front. And that project has caused
several refusals. Here's the table of contents. First, the notice of refusal, which I'll walk
through, all of which are existing conditions of the property, and one of which, namely the
occupied area we've actually reduced from the current condition letter of support from the
nice town tioga improvement team which we met with on march 19th a zoning map an aerial view
which provides a good view kind of showing exactly what i just explained regarding the
rear egress photographs architectural plans and drawings the rco meeting notice the application
for appeal the deed to the property and the certificate of tax clearance and again at
the conclusion, I'll ask Cheryl Tyler to adopt my testimony. And one more thing sort of before I
jump forward, I want to mention that Ms. Davidson and Ms. Tyler actually are owner-occupiers of this
property. It's a legally zoned triplex. Ms. Davidson lives on the ground floor. Her daughter
Cheryl lives on the floor above. And the third unit on the top floor doesn't have a long-term
tenant my understanding is when friends and family come to visit uh the two of them they use that
space to allow their visitors to have a space of their own technically out of the scope of the
presentation today but i just wanted to make that clear here's the notice of refusal it was issued
in january for the erection technically the legalization of a rear deck and the side addition
which we are seeking to erect.
The refusals are as follows.
One for the rear deck, which was installed in 2008 and has been there ever since.
While that does occupy the space that was the rear yard, we're still meeting the spirit
of the rear yard requirement of the code.
We're set back from the lot line.
We're not infringing on the light and air of any of our neighbors.
The next refusal is the occupied area.
I mentioned this already, but by changing the structure at the side of the building, we're actually reducing the occupied area by 20 square feet.
The next one is a rear yard depth requirement.
Again, kind of goes into the deck.
We have the space back there, but because it's a deck rather than just open ground, we're not sort of getting credit for that rear yard depth.
And then the last one is side yard width.
This is an existing condition of the property.
this is an existing condition of the property um we do meet the code uh requirement at certain
We do meet the code.
parts of the building structure but because it's not a flat wall going down the side there are
portions that that fall below the the side yard with requirement and again i'll note we're actually
increasing the side yard width by changing the building structure on the side here's a letter of
support, unanimous support from the coordinating RCO, Nicetown Tioga, improvement team. I felt
like we had a good understanding, and they were supportive of the fact that we were, you know,
making, you know, doing this appeal for life and safety purposes. Here's a zoning map. It is an RSA
3 zone, but again, we received zoning relief many years ago for the existing three-unit use.
google maps perspective and here's an aerial view you can see our property line is outlined here in
white this gray box that you're seeing below my mouse that's the existing rear egress steps on
the side of the structure you see that it goes all the way to the lot line and while i'll note
that there is no existing fence between our property and 1612-14 that could happen any day
and we wanted to make sure that the new structure didn't extend all the way to the lot line and
there was space to pass from the back to the front here's the photographs this is the front
you can see that structure here as well so when the proposed renovations are completed
you'll essentially just trace this sidewalk all the way back to our lot line
this little piece will be removed and this structure will be squeezed in slightly
here's the rear of the property here's the existing back deck here's the rear of that
egress which does lead directly down into the basement which is really just
it's an unfinished basement used for storage and for utilities this outdoor entrance was created
so that you know when utility workers were going to the basement they wouldn't have to go through
miss davidson's apartment and it also made it easier to bring you know the stuff that she's
storing down there up and down the stairs are a little bit wider and safer some more photos of
the rear of the property this is the notice posting here's to the right of the property
in west tayoga and to the left here's the architectural plans and drawings so i'll zoom
in here for you so this is a good side by side you can see this is the existing structure it's
10 feet 9 inches by 8 feet goes all the way to the lot line this is an eight yard eight foot
side yard that's sort of being infringed by this existing structure here's what we're posing to do
we're going to squeeze it in it'll be much narrower a little bit longer but it'll you know
So with it just with it being half of the width, four feet of width, it'll allow four feet of space to pass from back to work.
Here's the RCO meeting notice from our March 19th meeting where we received unanimous support.
An email showing that that notice also went out electronically for the coordinator's RCO.
87 properties were notified, bulk mailing certificates.
here's the application for appeal
the deed to the property
showing Ruth Davidson owns the property
and has since 2007
and the tax clearance
showing that no taxes are owed on the property
so with that I'd like to call
Ms. Tyler to adopt my testimony
we have Ruth Davidson with her hand up
I might be okay and they have been allowed to speak I could you please state your name and
spell for the stenographer
please yourself
okay okay so you hear me now yeah could yes please could you state your name and spell for
the stenographer. Yes, thank you so much. Cheryl, C-H-E-R-Y-L, last name Tyler, T-Y-L-E-R.
You swear a firm to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do. And Mr. Goldberg, she's not the owner. She's speaking for her mother. Is that what we're
saying? Cheryl, can you confirm that you're the daughter of Ruth Davidson, the record owner of
the property yes I'm her only child and my mom is 86 so she's just not all together you know
look what just kind of not you know she's definitely able to get around but
these type of things you know a little too much for her blood pressure okay
uh these type of things you know a little too much for her blood pressure okay uh she and i
both live there together all right thank you very much mr goldberg but miss tyler did you hear my
testimony today yes i did and was it true and correct to the best of your knowledge yes absolutely
100 true and correct do you adopt it as if it were your own yes i do thank you thank you
Questions from the board?
No, Mr. Chairman.
No, Chair.
Questions or comments from our attorney, Hillary Emerson?
Not at this time, Mr. Chair.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
I see no hands.
Planning Commission, please.
Thank you, Chair Bergman.
Sarah Bond with the Philadelphia City Planning Commission.
uh i have a couple of questions certainly for mr goldberg that's okay okay so um
mr goldberg you stated that okay so the the uh the current owner of the appellant built the rear
deck i'm not entirely sure if she built it but it has been there since around the time that she
purchased the property it was not built by cheryl tyler who was on the call to adopt my testimony
But it was built by the current owner who is applying for this, who's applying for the variance?
I can't say with certainty, but it may have been built towards the beginning of her ownership of the property.
So I'm going to, all right.
And the side structure was built before or after?
The side structure was built towards the end of 2018 and 2019 under the current ownership of Miss Davidson.
And while Miss Tyler was living there, when the construction happened, the contractor essentially walked off the job site, you know, in the midst of the construction.
Okay, but essentially, so the same owner in 2018, the owner in 2018 was the same owner as it was in 2008?
That's correct.
okay okay so so i'm going i'm sharing this testimony um just with the um just with the
information that we have that the same owner has been there um while both of these structures were
created um okay so i'm just just catching up on some of this information um all right so uh to
start all right the comprehensive plan recommends a zoning change at this location to rsa 5 um so
the both structures since they were built while the appellant while the appellant did own the
property um that is a hard that is a self-created hardship uh however um the side yard structure
the side yard requirement for rsa 5 is different than it is for rsa 3 because we recommend rsa 5
i will go with with that recommendation which is um five feet so i will say that's de minimis
however um so so that variance uh grant so grant with proviso uh that we deny the rear deck since
that's a self-created hardship and that is my testimony thank you all right thank you um
yeah please yeah so um regarding the rear deck miss davidson lives on the first floor
um she enjoys sitting out on her back deck it's not uh detrimentally impacting anyone it's been
there for um almost two decades so you know we would we would request that that variance be
grant as well. Thank you. MI 2024, 0003131510 West Tioga Street, I vote yes. Thomas Holliman,
my vote is yes. James Snell, my vote is yes. Thank you, counsel. Thank you. Number eight,
MI 2024-004-22-11101, Academy Road.
Robert Careless is the attorney.
Letter from Millbrook Civic Association.
Vote was 17 to 13 in favor.
And letter of non-opposition from the Councilman O'Neill.
Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman.
Good afternoon.
Could you state your name, please, and spell for the stenographer?
Certainly.
Robert Careless, R-O-B-E-R-T, Careless, C-A-R-E-L-E-S-S.
Right.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Could you identify your client, the relationship to the property?
Certainly.
I represent Catholic Housing and Community Services.
We are the contract purchaser of proposed parcel B, which is the smaller parcel of the two proposed under our application for a lot of adjustment for the property.
Okay. Mr. Holloman has just a few questions.
Mr. Holman has just a few questions.
Certainly.
Certainly.
Good afternoon.
Good afternoon, counsel. Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to his accuracy?
I do, Mr. Holloman, on both.
Did you email all of the exhibits and the documents as required five days in advance to this hearing?
Yes, I did.
Thank you. Please proceed and share your screen.
Mr. Chairman, are you able to see my screen?
I can. Great. Again, Bob Keralis of Cozen O'Connor, and I'm joined today by my colleague Tom Witt, as well as Suzanne O'Grady-Larito of Catholic Housing and Community Services, Nora Bergsten of CBP Architects, and Leslie Cunningham of Cornerstone Engineering.
And we are pleased to bring our application to the board today, which stems from an important project, proposed at the property to bring 48 affordable senior living apartments to a place where a vacant four-story building sits today.
Catholic Housing, my client, is a Division of Social Services of the Archdiocese of Philadelphia
and is committed to the Catholic Church's mission to serve those in need.
And as will be evidenced by this application, it does so through the provision of affordable living for seniors,
including services that lend toward the seniors' physical and spiritual well-being.
As I noted, the underlying zoning application to L&I proposes a lot-line adjustment of the subject property,
which is the site of Archbishop Ryan High School.
its grounds, and along with a four-story building to the school's south, which formerly housed the
Franciscan priests that taught at the school for a number of years. The priests were reassigned in
2008, and as I mentioned, the building sits vacant today. Under our lot line adjustment,
proposed parcel A will include Archbishop Ryan High School and its grounds with no changes
proposed. On smaller parcel B, from which we are the contract purchaser, we're proposing a renovation
to the existing four-story building, which we'll refer to as the Friary building.
The proposed renovation includes a three-story building addition for a total of 48 affordable
dwelling units, age-restricted for seniors, with 54 parking spaces, five bicycle spaces,
and associated improvements. The bedrooms are all one-bedroom units. Trash will be stored inside,
and there are other amenities of the building such as a garden, a fitness room, a community
room, and on-site laundry. The proposed lot adjustment for the creation of Parcel B is
needed for the financing for low-income housing tax credits. The number of units proposed are in
turn necessary for the LIHTC financing and therefore for the project to be successful.
And in order to achieve our 48 units, the proposed building addition is necessary.
Before I get into my exhibits, Mr. Chairman, I'll set the stage for the board here with our refusal. Our application to this board is twofold in terms of the relief requested from the code.
First, Catholic Housing is proposing a multifamily use of the vacant friary building, and under the RSA-4 zoning district, a multifamily use is not permitted.
And secondly, Catholic Housing is proposing a building addition height of 38 feet, where the maximum height permitted in the far northeast overlay district is 35 feet.
As I'll discuss, in order to marry the addition to the existing building floors of the four-story building, without the need to construct stairs for the seniors who will occupy the building, the additional height is necessary.
And I should also note that the proposed height of 38 feet would otherwise be compliant with the RSA-4 zoning.
Looking at the exhibits that I've submitted to the board today, on the second sheet we have an index for the board's reference that includes the 16 exhibits submitted, including all those that are required by the board's regulations.
Exhibit A-1 is the agreement of sale and purchase between Catholic housing and the archdiocese.
along with Exhibit A2, which is a letter of authorization from the Archdiocese to bring the application to L&I and to this board.
Exhibit A3 is our Stiput of Tax Compliance.
Exhibit A4 is our underlying zoning application to L&I.
Together with Exhibit A5, which are the companion zoning drawings that were submitted to L&I,
this is our subdivision plan.
This is our zoning site plan.
and in blue here you can see this is academy road where my cursor is indicating ryan drive
into the site this is the existing four-story building where my cursor is indicating with the
third with the three-story building addition where my cursor is indicating and you can see in blue
the proposed parcel drawing prepared to show the west east and south building elevations
our turning plan, and our landscape plan. Exhibit A-6 is our application to this board
Exhibit A6 is our application to this board together with the notice of refusal and the project information form.
together with the notice of
Exhibit A7 here is proof of posting. This is our posting along Academy Road.
You can see where my cursor is indicating the friary building.
This is Ryan Drive here with the high school where my cursor is indicating to the left.
The property also has frontage along Chalfont Drive, and this is the posting along that frontage as well.
Exhibit A8 is an atlas printout to show the board the configuration of the site.
Here is the frontage along Chalfont Drive that I was just referencing.
Academy Road here, which is the main frontage for the building.
And below it is just a printout from Google where you can get a better sense of the layout of the site.
Where my cursor is indicating is the existing friary building.
And then the high school on the larger ground here. And again, as I mentioned, no change is proposed to the high school.
Exhibit A9 for the board's reference are street perspective photographs. This is looking northbound on Academy Road, the top photograph.
The existing Friary building here, where my cursor is indicating to the right, this is a perspective from Ryan Drive into the site.
And then looking southbound on Academy Road with the high school here to the left of the picture, looking downward on Academy Road.
exhibit a 10 these are photographs of the existing friday rebuilding the board's perspective
and a view from the rear where the addition would go
exhibit a 11 are drawings prepared by cbp architects here you can see the existing
building with the new addition our parking landscaping and again archbishop bryan here
to the right where no changes are proposed this is a perspective view of the building addition
and i should note that the uh the building addition would would house 21
one-bedroom apartments the four-story building will house 27 one-bedroom apartments and as i
indicated uh the addition and the 21 units therein are necessary in order for the litec financing
and thus for the project to succeed this is an aerial view so you can see the scale and
perspective, especially against the school here, the existing friary building here, our proposed
building addition here, where my cursor is indicating our landscaping and the parking.
CIPA Day 12 is our proof of mailing, a meeting notice. We met to the neighbor's. We notified
236 near neighbors. And as I'm scrolling on the side here, you can see the proofs of mailing
to the 236 properties that were required to receive a notice. Exhibit A13 is a letter from
Millbrook Civic Association. We met with Millbrook on March 26th, and the majority of those in
attendance were in favor of the application, 17 in favor, 13 against. Exhibit A14 is a letter from
Councilman Brian O'Neill stating his non-opposition to the project. Exhibits A15 and A16 are the
respective CVs of our design professionals. Mr. Chairman, before I ask my witnesses to be
promoted to adopt my factual testimony to the board today, I would like to offer some legal
arguments to the board for the record. As I mentioned a number of times, the building,
the Friary building sits vacant today. The building is unsuited for any reasonable reuse,
no longer needed for housing for the Franciscan priest who, as I mentioned earlier, were reassigned
approximately 16 years ago. Case law supports the grant of the variance for the multifamily use.
Under cases such as the Commonwealth Court's decision in Wagner versus the City of Erie's
hearing board, a building can be the premise for a grant of a variance, and that is entitled
to be used in a manner that does not involve demolition or extensive reconstruction. So,
while this board is most commonly familiar with hardship cases being presented as physical
characteristics of the land, in instances such as the matter before the board today, our matter,
the Commonwealth Court has held that hardship can relate to the building itself.
Here, the RSA-4 allows single-family household by right. Group living for personal care is a
special exception. Single-room residences are not permitted, and even if they were,
that type of a living for priests or nuns is no longer necessary.
So the hardship justifying the grant of the variance for the multifamily use is founded in the fact that the most reasonable use, which is practical today, is multifamily apartments.
And to that end, because the building is not large enough to permit financing under the LIHTC program, the building addition is necessary.
As it relates to the dimensional variance for the extra three feet in height, the location of the existing floor.
I can see if I have a
Let's see if I have a better image here for the board.
The location of the existing floor elevations are set, and we are trying to marry the second
and third floors of the new additions to the upper levels of the existing buildings, again,
without having stairs for the seniors who will inhabit the building. The roof structure
of the addition is deeper than the existing roof structure for the existing building,
which is comprised of concrete and metal joists, thus making the roof higher, hence the need for
the additional three feet. And as I mentioned, the 38 feet would otherwise be compliant with
the underlying zoning if it wasn't for the restriction of the overlay district.
And as this board is aware, it is permitted by the zoning code to consider the detriments of
the applicant in refusing a dimensional variance. Here, the additional three feet is necessary to
achieve the building addition to provide the requisite number of apartments to achieve the
LIHTC financing as the existing building is not large enough. And without the LIHTC financing,
the project would not be successful. Accordingly, this is the minimum variance necessary to afford
the reasonable reuse of the building. In terms of conflicts and traffic congestions,
there will not be a substantial increase in traffic congestion. I note that Ryan's enrollment
is down from its historical figures. At its height, the enrollment of the high school was
approximately 4,600 students in 1975. The projected enrollment for next year is 880 students.
The building's capacity is far greater than its current population, and therefore,
granting the relief here would not cause a substantial increase in traffic congestion.
There will also be no detriment to the public health, safety, and welfare from the granted
relief here. We're bringing a low-impact but vibrant use to a vacant building. So, Mr. Chairman,
And with that said, could I please ask Suzanne O'Grady-Larito of Catholic Housing to raise her hand and be promoted as a panelist to adopt my testimony?
Suzanne has been allowed to speak.
Could you state your name and then spell for the stenographer, please?
Suzanne O'Grady-Larito, S-U-Z-A-N-N-E, O'Grady, O-G-R-A-D-Y, Larito, L-A-U-R-I-T-O.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Please proceed, counsel.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Suzanne, could you just tell the board your position with Catholic Housing and Community Services?
I'm the Director of Catholic Housing and Community Services.
and Suzanne did you hear my testimony to the board today I did and would you adopt and
affirm that testimony as if your own I do thank you no further questions for Ms. Suzanne if I
could ask Nora Bergsten to raise her hand and be promoted she's part of the group too
Ms. Bergsten's our architect on the project okay
no i'm allowed to speak i could you please state your name and spell for this stenographer
sure it's nora n-o-r-a last name bergston b-e-r-g-s-t-e-n do you swear or affirm to tell
the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth i do please proceed counsel nor you are the project
architect for the development yes and did you hear my testimony to the board today i did and
would you adopt and affirm that testimony? Is it your own? I do. Thank you. Could I have one more
witness, Mr. Bergman? Sure. Sure. We see a hand. Hi, could you please state your name and spell
for the stenographer? Hi, my name is Leslie Cunningham, L-E-S-L-I-E-C-U-N-N-I-N-G-H-A-M.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Please proceed, counsel.
Thank you.
Leslie, you are the civil engineer for the development?
Correct.
And the drawings that I showed today were prepared by you or under your supervision?
Did you hear my testimony to the board today?
And would you adopt and affirm that testimony as if it were your own?
No further questions, Mr. Chairman?
Thank you.
Questions from the board?
No, Mr. Chairman.
No, Mr. Chairman.
Questions or comments from our attorney, Hillary Emerson?
Not at this time, Mr. Chair.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
Yes, Chair, we have Alex Udovich with their hand raised first.
They have been allowed to speak.
Good morning, Alex.
Good afternoon, Chairman.
You were already sworn to state your name for the record.
Certainly, Alice Udovich, U-D-O-V-I-C-H, on behalf of Councilman Brian O'Neill.
the councilman supports the granting of the variance at this location.
Thank you for calling. We appreciate it.
Thank you.
Anyone else in the virtual audience?
yes chair we have two hands and nicole has been allowed to speak first
Yes, Chair, we have two hands.
hi could you please state your name and spell for the stenographer my name is nicole krepel
n-i-c-o-l-e-k-r-i-p-p as in peter e-l right do you swear do you swear or firm to tell the truth
the whole truth and nothing but the truth yes i do i have a question well okay are you for first
one more thing. Are you a neighbor? Yes, I am. Okay, please proceed. I live on the 3500 block
of Brookview Road, if that's helpful. Okay. Yes, thank you. Great. I'd like to know whether or not
you have made application for the LIHTC tax credits, and if you've made them on a 4% or 9%
basis, if you're able to answer that at this time. Is Ms. Grady Lurito still a panelist with me today?
I know the application has been made. The second part of our question, I don't know if we have any information to be able to answer that today, but I'll let my client confirm that.
Yes, the application was made and it was for 9% tax credits.
Okay, thank you very much. That's all.
Thank you.
Anyone else in the virtual audience?
Lorraine has been allowed to speak.
i could just state your name for the record please yes my name is lorraine mueller
okay uh if i understand i swore you in earlier this morning didn't i
yes yes okay please proceed are you a neighbor yes i am a neighbor who lives around the corner
from this. Okay, please proceed. Okay, well, are they, first of all, is this hearing about the
entire lot? Because when I read the zoning notice, it said lot A, lot B, like, are they going to chop
up more of it? It's a beautiful addition to the neighborhood, but I grant it, it's an empty
building and can be put to better use. But is this, are we talking about the entire lot from
where the semi-divided homes end, where the fence is, over to the driveway of Archbishop
Bryan High School.
Counsel, you want to answer that or no?
Ms. Mueller, we are only proposing to subdivide, to adjust the lot line, to create two lots
And I can, if you can see my screen.
I can.
And you're also proposing to have the driveway shared with the high school.
Correct.
yes okay well a lot of the students use the back of the high school that driveway is in
use quite often and i also have a problem with not only students and housing residents sharing a
driveway but the number of parking spaces allowed like so is the flow over going to go to archbishop
bryan high school i mean yeah neighborhood is crowded enough i mean the people on the 30
um yeah on the 1100 block of academy road are parking across the street and they have driveways
and some have garages or are we expecting these seniors such as myself not to have cars by the
way i do i'm sorry um chair this is tanya um miss muller you're only here to give your opinion
uh whether you agree or disagree in the project not to ask questions thank you very kindly ma'am
well well miss muller it looks like i'm outnumbered no you're not outnumbered the
questions are you know i mean before i agree or disagree i would like to i listen to the whole
thing but the i'm very familiar with this neighborhood after 38 years but the drawings
the blueprints went by rather quickly i couldn't but but there was a meeting earlier too at the
millbrook civic association okay well i was not aware of that and i live in modena park not millbrook
all right well thank you for your if you don't want to take a position then thank you
Anyone else?
I see no hands.
Planning Commission.
Thank you, Chair Bergman, Sarah Bond with the Philadelphia City Planning Commission.
In 2021, the zoning map was amended to RSA 4 at this location in accord with recommendations from the comprehensive plan.
The proposed use will not cause detrimental impacts to the neighborhood beyond what might normally be expected.
Additionally, the City Planning Commission recently provided a letter of support for the associated grant.
Additionally, the City Planning Commission recently provided a letter of support for the associated grant to provide affordable senior housing at this location.
We therefore recommend that the Zoning Board grants the variance.
Thank you. MI 2024-000422-11101 Academy Road, I vote yes.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes.
James Snell, my vote is yes.
Thank you. You have your votes.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, members of the board.
Number 11, MI 2024-000-426-2200 Weefsheet Lane.
David Tustody is the attorney.
There's a letter of support from the Harrogate Civic Association,
a letter of support from Councilmember Driscoll,
and a letter of non-opposition from Councilmember Squall's office.
Counsel, could you please state your name and spell for the course tonight?
Sure. It's David Schutte, silent T, and that's spelled T-S-H-U-D-Y.
I'm with Troutman Pepper Hamilton Sanders LLP, and our address is 2 Logan Square, Suite 3000, Philadelphia.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Could you identify your client and relationship to the property?
My client is Walmart Stores East LP, and it is the ground lessee of a portion of 2200 Weisheif Lane.
Mr. Holman has a few questions for you.
Good afternoon, counsel. Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to his accuracy?
Did you email all the exhibits and documents as required five days in advance to this hearing?
I did, and then the exhibit package was updated twice, once yesterday and once this morning,
yesterday to include the letters of support from the Harrogate Civic Association
and from the City Councilman's Office, and it was updated this morning
to answer some of the Board Council's questions as to the location of the property.
Okay, please proceed and share your screen.
Okay, let me share my screen.
And. Can you see my screen now? No, you cannot. OK, I'm trying. OK, it's coming up now.
All right. All right. Good afternoon. My name is David Schutte. I'm with Troutman Pepper and we represent Walmart Stores East LP in the virtual audience.
We have Kelly Halstead, who's with the Walmart Legal Department, and she'll be affirming my testimony at the conclusion of the presentation.
Our client has an existing store at 2200 Wee Sheaf Lane.
And at that store, it desires to start an online tire sales program.
where customers will order tires online, go to the store to pick them up, and then take them to their home
or to an auto repair store off of our property to repair or replace their tires.
Because the property is located in the CA2 zoning district, we're seeking a special exception for the use of vehicle equipment
and Supplies, Sales, and Rental. I'll tick through the
exhibit booklet for you. We have our
first exhibit is the Notice of Referral
dated December 26, 2023. Again,
the use is permitted by special exception in the
CA2 Zoning District.
And then, this is our application, is Exhibit 2.
and the project information form is Exhibit 3.
Exhibit 4 is a deed into the property owner,
which is IBDP Realty 2 LP.
And then Exhibit 5 is the ground lease between the landlord and our client.
Get down to that here.
Zip through here if we can.
And as pointed out by...
And as pointed out by the board's council this morning, this exhibit did not have all of the exhibits to it, identifying where the property is.
So we attached exhibits 14 and 15 to the exhibit booklet this morning, which is the memorandum of lease that has a meets and bounds description of the lease premises, and also exhibit 15, which is the site plan of the project from the approved development in 2011.
11. And we'll zip through. The lease is quite lengthy, so we'll zip through this as well.
And then exhibit six is the tax clearance. Exhibit seven is the zoning map showing that
The property is located within the CA2 zoning district.
Exhibit eight is the photos of the posting of the property.
And then
Exhibit 9 is photos of the surrounding area, showing that it's generally a commercial area.
And exhibit 10, the RCO notification letters.
We sent out two of them.
One to notify the neighboring property owners of the petition.
And the second is to notify them of the specific date of the RCO meeting.
And then we have an affidavit of service signed by Donna Brooks, a paralegal at my firm.
And then, a second here, and Exhibit 13, as I mentioned earlier, which was added to the exhibit package yesterday, are the letters of support from Harrowgate Civic Association, which was the RCO, and from the Philadelphia, and from a council member, Driscoll.
As I mentioned earlier, this is merely to allow for the use of the property for the online tire sales service in which, again, customers order tires online and then pick them up at the store.
There's no new exterior development, no construction related to this application.
Rather, we're just looking for the special exception to allow for this additional commercial use.
Why don't you bring your client on for Adopt Your Testimony?
Absolutely.
Kelly Halstead, if she's still in the virtual room.
Kelly Halstead, she has been allowed to speak.
Hi, could you please state your name and spell for the court stenographer?
Hi, this is Kelly Halstead, and that's K-E-L-L-Y-H-A-L-S-T-E-A-D.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Yes, sir.
Please proceed, counsel.
Ms. Halstead, did you listen to my presentation this afternoon?
I did.
okay and it is everything that i said uh uh true and accurate on it is okay thank you questions
from the board no mr chairman
sorry about that no no that's fine jim i i i got it uh no questions all right thank you
Questions or comments from our attorney, Hillary Emerson?
Not at this time.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
I see no hands.
Planning Commission.
Thank you, Chair Bergman.
Sarah Bond with the Philadelphia City Planning Commission.
The comprehensive plan recommends no change to the existing auto-oriented commercial zoning.
The proposed use will not cause detrimental impacts to the neighborhood beyond what might normally be expected.
The proposed use will not cause detrimental impacts to the neighborhood beyond what might normally be expected.
The City Planning Commission recommends that the Zoning Board grant the special exception.
Thank you. MI 2024-000-426-2200 Weesheath Lane, I vote yes.
Thomas Holliman, my vote is yes.
James Snell, my vote is yes.
Thank you. You have your votes, Counsel.
Thank you very much.
All right. Number 12, MI 2024, 000428, 1102 Germantown Avenue. Ronald Patterson is the
attorney. We do not see an RCO letter at this point. Ronald Patterson is coming in as a panelist.
Hi, Mr. Patterson, could you state your name and spell, please, for the court's sonographer?
Hi, good afternoon, Mr. Chairman.
Ronald Patterson, R-O-N-A-L-D, P-A-T-T-E-R-S-O-N, Clare Harrison Law Firm, 1835 Market Street.
Right.
Do you swear a firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Could you identify your client, the relationship to this property?
Sure. I'm here on behalf of the owner, SDG, 1102 Germantown Avenue, and the tenant, the newsroom restaurant.
Okay. And Mr. Holloman has just a few questions, sir.
Good afternoon, counsel. Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and to restipulate to his accuracy?
Yes, I do.
Did you email all the exhibits and documents as required five days in advance to this hearing?
Yes, I did.
Thank you. Free for a seat and serious claim.
Okay. Can you see my screen?
Okay. Great. Thank you. So this regards 1102 Germantown Avenue. It's actually here,
this is 2nd Street in Northern Liberties. And as you go towards the right where I'm depicting,
we are at Girard Avenue. So it's Germantown Avenue kind of slices through here and creates this corner.
So this building is a fairly new building.
It's a six-story building having 50 residential dwelling units above.
On the first floor, there are two, we'll call it commercial spaces.
We were here in 2022 for a restaurant along this area here called SIN, S-I-N, Southern Italian Nightlife.
So today we're here for, there's a small space in the rear, 1,936 square feet.
uh the entrance is back through here which will show in this next photograph
we would walk down to the back of this building and enter the entrance there
this is from the opposite end of the building you see sin sin here this is a shared driveway in the
rear this is a view germantown avenue towards second street again the rear driveway and this
This is relevant here. It goes back in this area. You'll see there's an enclosed area
here where trash will be placed for a pickup once it's picked up from the inside of the
building. Entrance is showing the zoning posters. There's an interior photograph of the build
out coming along, and here's the area where the trash will be picked up in the rear.
It's an overall site plan just to get acclimated at Germantown Avenue. Here's the entrance area I
was just showing you, this easement area. This portion back here is not part of the property.
The entrance down this walkway, and here's the area here, small little area.
So the use is called the newsroom, which will be a speakeasy restaurant theme with an Asian fusing cuisine by a Michelin star chef, Michael Calantes of Solesky, Florida.
It's a full service restaurant, even though a small restaurant.
Here are some interior renderings with the six or seven tables, bar area, very handsomely appointed. Of course, not a nightclub, it's a very high-end bar lounge for that particular area.
This matter is a refusal, I'm sorry, referral for a takeout, I'm sorry, for an Indian restaurant.
I'm sorry, referral for a takeout. I'm sorry, for an Indian restaurant. And we're here for special exception approval because the property is in the North Delaware Avenue overlay, which requires special exception.
We did meet with the Northern Liberties Neighborhood Association, and I guess they didn't submit a letter, but I do have an email somewhere I could show you that there was support for the application.
Um, we believe that this, uh, special exception is justified. Uh, the use will not create any adverse impacts on the public health, safety or welfare, and or would it create any impacts that would otherwise be expected by a permitted use. And that's all evidenced by the fact that the civic group was in favor and as well as a neighbor. So with that said, I would like to promote Mr. Mike Kanoveski with a K.
Mr. Patterson, could you make sure Hillary gets a copy of the email?
And bring your client on and we'll have your testimony adopted.
Mike Kinovetsky, please raise your virtual hand.
Sir, could you state your name, please, and spell for the stenographer?
The full name is Ilya, I-L-Y-A, Michael Konefsky, and everything stated is true.
Do me a favor. Could you spell your name out for that?
Yeah, it's I-L-Y-A-M-I-C-H-A-E-L-K. The last name is K-A-N-E-V-S-K-Y.
Right. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Please proceed, counsel. Thank you. Mr. Konefsky, what is your relationship to the tenant?
I'm the owner of the restaurant. Beautiful. And you've heard my testimony. Would you agree that
it's true and accurate? Yes, everything's true. And you would adopt it as if it were your own?
Yes. You want to briefly explain to the board the nature of the use here,
if it's any different than what I've explained?
We're a small 50-seat restaurant.
We have a nice chef.
It's actually a Latin-Asian fusion.
We noticed the neighborhood does not have this type of cuisine,
so we think we'll be a great addition to the neighborhood.
Do you have another location?
Yes, we have a current location in Long Island City, New York.
It's doing really well.
We have over 4.5 star reviews everywhere, and because it was taken so well by the neighborhood here, we wanted to expand and open a new one.
Okay, that's all I have, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you.
Questions from the board?
No, Mr. Chairman.
sorry chair no questions thank you
questions or comments from our attorney hillary emerson not at this time mr chair
questions or comments from the virtual audience
i see no hands planning commission
Thank you, Chair Bergman. Sarah Bond with the Philadelphia City Planning Commission.
In 2014, the zoning map was amended from CMX 2.5 at this location in accord with recommendations from the comprehensive plan.
The proposed use will not cause detrimental impacts to the neighborhood beyond what might normally be expected.
The City Planning Commission recommends that the zoning board grant the special exception.
M.I. 2024-000-428-1102 Germantown Avenue, I vote yes.
Thomas Holloman, I vote yes.
James Snell, I vote yes.
Thank you, counsel. Thank you.
Number 13, MI2024, 000430, 1935 Cater Street.
Henry Clinton is the attorney.
Letter of support from South of South Neighborhood Association.
Nowak was concerned about the use of basement.
um mr clinton you've already been sworn uh could you just state your name for the record
sure henry clinton c-l-i-n-t-o-n could you identify your client their relationship
Sure. Henry Clinton, C-L-I-N-T-O-N.
Could you identify your client, their relationship to the property?
Sure. My client is Philip Conway. He is to my right, your left.
He is the principal of the LLC, which owns the property.
And Mr. Holloman has just a few questions.
Good afternoon, counsel.
Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to his accuracy?
I do, Mr. Holloman.
Did you email all of the exhibits and documents as required five days in advance to this hearing?
Yes, we did.
Thank you. Please proceed and share your screen.
Is that visible, Mr. Chairman?
Yes, it is.
Again, good afternoon, Mr. Chairman, members of the board.
Henry Clinton for owner 1798 investors, the principal of which is to my right, Mr. Philip Conway.
Table of Contents A1 through A10.
Again, this is a proposal to demolish a very small home on the 1900 block of Cater Street and to rebuild it as a single-family home with a mansert roof in lieu of an eight-foot setback, similar to another property that's already been done that way on the block.
And we see this more and more in Sazna.
The design that we have prepared, you'll see we've made numerous changes to comport with the neighborhood wishes.
And this is the preferred method of doing a third floor in the neighborhood.
We have two refusals. One has to do with occupied area, maximum occupied area. We're only five percentage points off. And the second refusal is what I just referred to. If you build a three-story property between abutting lots that have two-story homes, the code calls for an eight-foot setback.
But the neighborhood certainly doesn't prefer that design, doesn't like that design, and the homes are already small.
And if you have an eight-foot setback, it makes the home even more unusable than it already is.
We do have an RCO letter of support from SASNA.
You can see that we made changes incorporating a mansert roof.
We've reduced the height of the structure and then maintained consistency with the existing basement level of the adjoining properties, which is really important.
Therefore, we don't have to underpin either basement on either side.
And then we decreased the floor-to-floor heights as requested.
And you'll see when I get to my proviso form, we actually made more changes than that.
And NOAC did raise concern about the basement, and we've changed that designation in the basement.
and you'll see when I get to the plan on that.
So the vote was seven to three in support of the project.
Photos, just to give you perspective,
this is the 1900 block of Cater Street.
This is 1935 here.
Three doors down, you can see a similar structure
was designed and built with a mansert roof
and a dormer on the third floor.
Our third floor is a little bit different,
but generally in similarity with it.
An overhead view, Cater Street, we are not going to come out any further than one of the homes on one side of the building, and I'll show you that with the site plan.
This is looking down the street, again, showing you some of the two-story homes on the block.
Our postings of the notices, and these are all the changes we've made.
I already alluded to the height of the building.
We enlarged the second floor cornice and detailed it more to give it some more character.
We changed the front window styles.
The front facade of the elevations was specified as red brick.
We changed the front entry steps from concrete to brick, again, to give it a richer flavor and a more colonial look.
The front windows were also changed.
And we do have one page Z, 001 to stamp if the board looks kindly upon this application.
These are the elevation.
All the clouds are, as the board knows, these are the changes that we made.
You can see the rich cornice line on the second floor, the dormer look on the mansion roof,
the roof with a railing to keep sight lines open, pilot house for access to the rooftop deck.
Then on to the right-hand side where my cursor is, you can see the depth of our building
is actually less than the depth of the property to the right, which is 1933, a little bit
deeper than 1937, but we've kind of split the difference between those two properties.
Again, brick on the front, some metal on the top, and here's the rear elevation.
The other thing that's noted is we do have a breezeway or a baker's alley in between
You know, our property, the adjacent property, which gives you access to the rear yard to bring your trash out and to access your rear yard in any way.
to bring your trash out and to, you know, access your rear yard in any way.
Floor plan, here's the change we made into the basement.
We removed the closet, and this is an office area in the basement.
First floor, kitchen, living area.
Two bedrooms on the third floor, excuse me, on the second floor.
On the third floor, one large bedroom, master bath, with rooftop access to a deck.
again just showing the front elevation and perspective to the homes on either side with
the baker's alley in between we decrease the mass of the steps add a brick again the cornice line
and on the left hand side where my cursor is you can see that the roof line and rather than going
straight up is can it to the back with a dormer projecting to give to try to take away from that
that tunnel look that you would get with a straight three-story house on some of these
smaller streets in the city. Application for appeal, tax clearance, zoning map indicating
RSA 5, deed indicating ownership. This is our notice of mailing where we mailed out 173 pieces
of mail to the adjacent neighbors. So in conclusion, we're basically going to renovate a lot by
demolishing an existing building, building a brand new building without underpinning on either side,
making the house a little bit larger, more accommodating for a family. We're keeping in
with the style of the block with other mansert roof on the block. We're keeping in conformity
with what Sazen likes to see.
If you're going to put a third floor,
we're not impacting any light or air on either side.
We're not impacting development
of any adjacent properties.
We're not as deep as the adjacent property
on the one side.
And we're basically in harmony with the code
and in harmony with the community's wishes.
With that, I would conclude
and would ask my client
if he could adopt my testimony.
If you want to swear him in, Mr. Chairman.
Sir, could you please state your name and spell for the stenographer?
It's Philip Conway, P-H-I-L-I-P-C-O-N-W-A-Y.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Please proceed, counsel.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Conway, you were sitting here when I presented your project, correct?
Correct.
If you had the opportunity to testify, would you adopt my testimony as your own and as your own correct?
Yes, I would.
Thank you, Mr. Conway.
questions from the board no mr chairman no chair questions or comments from our attorney hillary
emerson not at this time mr chair questions or comments from the virtual audience yes chair we
have one hand canned up jim nolan and they have been allowed to speak hi could you please state
your name and spell for the court's demographer
jim nolan please unmute yourself apologies that was a misclick on my part
hi mr nolan could you state your name and spell for the court stenographer
yes sorry that was a misclick on my part apologies hi could you state your name and
spell for the court stenographer sure james nolan j-a-m-e-s n-o-l-a-n right do you swear
a firm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth sure are you and are you neighbor
sir uh i'm not familiar with this project i apologize this was a misclick on my part within
okay oh thank you thank you sir sorry about that um anyone else in the virtual audience
no hands planning commission
thank you chair bergman sarah bond with the philadelphia city planning commission
the comprehensive plan recommends no change the existing residential single-family zoning
the relatively shallow dimension of the property creates a hardship for the appellant the city
planning commission recommends that the zoning board grant the variance thank you mi 2024 000
0 4 3 0 1935 cater street i vote yes with proviso revised plan one page stamped by zba april 10th
2024 thomas hollowan my vote is yes with proviso james snell my vote is yes with proviso thank you
counsel. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, members of the board. Thank you. No, right. Number 14, MI 2024,
zero, zero, zero, four, nine, eight, 15, 16, 18 Walnut Street. Ronald Patterson is the attorney.
There's a letter of non-opposition from the Center City Residence Association, which
There's a letter of non-opposition from the Center City Residence Association, Wits Proviso.
Mr. Patterson, you've already been sworn.
Just state your name for the record, please.
Ronald Patterson, P-A-T-T-E-R-S-O-N.
Right.
Could you identify your client and relationship to the property?
Good afternoon.
Disregards 1518 Walnut Street, but known as the actual address is 151618.
I'm here today.
We have my client, which is Levain, L-E-V-A-I-N, bakery.
Okay, and Mr. Holloman has just a few questions.
Good afternoon, counsel.
Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to his accuracy?
Yes, I do.
Did you email all the exhibits and documents as required five days in advance to this hearing?
Yes, I did.
Thank you. Please proceed and share your screen.
Okay. Are you able to view my screen?
Okay, great. Thank you.
So, as I mentioned in this regards, we'll call it 1518 Walnut Street.
It's actually on the corner of Walnut and Sindenham Street.
Beautiful old building, last used for the sale of suits.
And I think before that, it might have been the Allen Rothenberg legal office.
office. Here's a view of the side, Sindenham Street, then a view looking at Walnut Street,
our posters. So as I mentioned, it's Levain Bakery, Levain Cookies. They are making a foray
into Philadelphia. They have at least 15 other locations, nine in New York City, one in DC,
in Maryland, Boston, two in Chicago, and in LA. As you'll see, it's unlike any other
cookie bakery you probably have ever seen. There's a beautiful renovation of the facades
of the building. And as we'll go through the interior renderings, you'll see that it's
It's a counter service with minimal amount of seats, seven seats, with cooking on premises and venting through a controlled ventilation onto Sindenham Street.
It'll be interior storage of trash, which I'll show you where in a minute, this location here, and then taking out for by commercial trash hauler on Sindenham Street.
uh this is properties located in the cmx 5 commercial zoning district subject to the center
city control overlays and on walnut street this has classified whether it's a takeout restaurant
or prepared foods and we filed as a takeout restaurant will require a special exception grant
by the zoning board we believe that this use will have no adverse impact on the public health safety
Welfare and Traffic. We met with the Center City Residence Association, which after a public meeting
voted not to oppose, and we agreed to their standard provisos for takeout restaurant. And so
we believe that that would justify the special exception, that it would not create any adverse
impacts or detrimental impacts over what would be expected from a permitted use. With that said,
if we could promote Stephanie Menke, M-E-N-K-E, my first witness.
Stephanie Menke has been allowed to speak. Hi, could you please state your name and spell for
the stenographer? Hi, my name is Stephanie Menke, S-T-E-P-H-A-N-I-E, last name Menke, M-E-N-K-E.
Swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth. I do. Please proceed,
Council. Thank you. Stephanie, you've heard my presentation. Would you agree that it is true and
accurate? I do. Would you adopt it as if it were your own? I do. Could you briefly tell the board
what Levain is and what you want to do? Sure. I'll give a brief overview of the brand. Levain
Bakery is a New York City-based bakery that was founded by two women on the Upper East,
up on West Side in New York City. It's a local bakery that started with making breads and
eventually evolved into making cookies. The brand grew extremely slowly over the course of the
subsequent 29 years. And as Ron mentioned, we have over a dozen locations, mostly up the
Northeast Corridor with two locations in Chicago and one location in Los Angeles.
Expansion has been very slow and intentional as we have never closed a location before. So we have
only ever opened and stayed open in our locations. And that's a reflection of a very thoughtful real
a very thoughtful real estate expansion selection strategy. One of the key selection criteria is
estate expansion selection strategy. One of the key.
identifying neighborhoods that we feel that the bakery could really invest in and become a core
piece of the fabric of the neighborhood. And that's what we have identified within Philadelphia
and specifically within this location in Walnut Street in Rittenhouse. We sell principally baked
goods all day with a small selection of beverages such as teas and coffees. You can see here in this
display case uh examples of the the products that we would sell which are primarily cookies are
what we're most known for um we also sell you know uh other products such as breads muffins
throughout the day uh it's a really fun job and a really fun place to to be a cornerstone for the
neighborhood and we love what we do we're really proud of the products we make um it's hard to work
here and not eat cookies all day uh we think it'll be a great addition and stephanie uh number
seats or seven seats proposed if someone wants to have a cookie while they're there correct
that's correct and the days of hours of operation you propose seven days a week that is correct
and hours uh roughly uh eight to ten potentially longer
and um since we're always interested in trash um this is your floor plan the red dot is your
trash room that is correct and then we picked up by a commercial trash hauler as i mentioned
previously correct that is correct and given the nature of the business there's pretty minimal
trash okay and event thing you'd be cooking on site uh what kind of what kind of cooking will
be happening inside it'll be primarily the baking of goods which will take place in our ovens
okay convection ovens uh uh yes okay um i know for other questions mr chairman
thank you um do you have any other witnesses uh no i don't think so i don't think okay thank you
questions from the board no mr chairman no chair questions or comments from our attorney hillary
emerson just a couple quick clarifications mr patterson are you representing both the owner
and the tenant in this matter no just the tenant okay because we we didn't get a copy of the lease
we only got a copy of the deed so we were under the impression you were representing the owner
well i always thought it was either or so that's what i'm saying but i'm happy to submit the lease
okay yes if you could if you could supplement that would be great um and and there's no signage
proposed as part of this application. Is that correct? That's correct. Yeah, that was just for
informational purposes, yeah. Okay, that's what I thought. Thank you.
Washington comments from the virtual audience.
We have Wade Albert with your hand up, and they have been allowed to speak.
Mr. Albert, just state your name for the record, please, and spell for the stenographer.
Sure. Wade Albert, W-A-D-E, last name A-L-B-E-R-T.
Right. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
yes i do mr chair please proceed sir thank you i'm counsel for the center city
residents association the coordinating rco for this this project um uh i uh i echo what mr
patterson said that uh ccra does not oppose this project um and in our decision letter as and as
also referenced in the supplemental letter that we submitted yesterday we just ask that if the zba
is inclined to grant this request
that the provisos be included in the permit,
specifically the trash provisos.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Anyone else in the Berks audience?
I see no hands.
Planning Commission.
Thank you, Chair Bergman.
Sarah Bond with the Philadelphia City Planning Commission.
The comprehensive plan recommends no change
to the existing commercial mixed-use zoning.
the proposed use will not cause detrimental impacts to the neighborhood beyond what might
normally be expected. The City Planning Commission recommends that the Zoning Board grant the special
exception. Thank you. MI 2024-000-498-1516-18 Walnut Street, I vote yes with proviso. Ventilation
through sidewall to Sydenham Street, interior trash storage. Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes
with proviso name snell my vote is yes with proviso thank you sir moving on to number 15
mi 2024 000 500 1400 to 38 north howard street michael phillips is the attorney
a letter of support from south kensington community partners based on an amended mou
Hi, Mr. Phillips. Could you please state your name and spell for this stenographer?
I'm Mr. Phillips.
Good afternoon, Chairman Bergman, members of the board. Michael Phillips, M-I-C-H-A-E-L-P-H-I-L-L-I-P-S
with Claire Harrison Harvey Bransberg. On behalf of the owner of the property, AP 1400 North Howard
Street, LLC. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
I do. Mr. Hallman has just a few questions.
Good afternoon, Counselor. Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to his accuracy?
I do. Did you email all the exhibits and documents as required five days in advance of this hearing?
I did not email it five days in advance due to my associate went on an early paternity leave and there was confusion.
However, we did get everything over to Ms. Emerson this morning, and we did meet with the community, and the property has been posted, so all of the exhibits are in need.
Thank you. Pre-proceed and share your screen.
so good afternoon everyone michael phillips on behalf of ap 1400 north howard street llc
we are here today seeking special uh some special exception approvals for this um already uh
constructed one-story building in South Kensington. By way of background, in 2020,
we received variances to allow the property to be treated as if it's CMX2, so retail and office uses
and general commercial uses in line with CMX2. Here, I'll just orient you with...
why it's not going beyond
page 10. so here just give me a moment
so here's some more uh quarters of the property this property takes up um four blocks total
um why i'm having all these issues
and here is a site uh a site plan so the reason we're before uh the board right now is uh over
the past few years we've been uh our client has sought to lease out um the spaces as you'll notice
on the plan there are two spaces right now that have been leased this is a space for celebrate
which is a school, a daycare school, and we also have recently leased out this space for a general
office use. But a number of prospective tenants have approached our client who are either in the
food industry or group medical offices, and there's been particular interest from the group
medical office section. However, the tenants are not willing to go through the special exception
or variance approval process themselves, and so any prospects have died on the line.
So knowing that, we have reached out to South Kensington and have engaged in discussions about
expanding the current CMX2 uses that were permitted at the end of 2020 and for which we are still
utilizing to include three specific uses that normally would be allowed in CMX2 by a special
exception. The first is animal services with no boarding expressly noted, and that would be to
be able to lease to a veterinary clinic or a doctor. The second is group medical health
dental practitioner, and the third would be a takeout restaurant. Now, all of those uses
require special exception approval and CMX2, and we believe that they are all community
benefits and amenities at this space. We specifically, I want to make note, are not
seeking other special exception uses, including assembly and entertainment, and that is not within
the expanded scope and was something that was important to South Kensington community partners.
It appears that my cursor is working again. Here is the property. You'll see it is it's large
bounded on all four sides, zoned RSA 5. And here, this is a copy of the
And here, this is a copy of the 2020 variants that you'll note was for business professional offices, vacant retail sales and commercial uses as permitted in CMX2.
We had discussions with the community and there were a number of provisos that we were willing to agree to.
Now, some of the proposed provisos from South Kensington Community Partners are not zoning issues.
and have been memorialized in a community benefits agreement, but there are some that
are specific zoning issues, and I'll talk to those.
The first is hours of operations, which we agreed to limit to 10 o'clock on Monday through
Friday and until midnight on weekends.
We also agreed to not lease or use any portion of the property as a drug rehabilitation center
and to not lease for medical marijuana sale and uses.
Beyond that, the other provisos that we did agree to regarding security measures,
parking validations, and agreeing to not seek special exception approval
for either a nightclub or casino use,
I do not believe are either pertinent or can be part of a proviso with respect to the special
exception use. Again, it would require special exception approval. We'd have to come back
anyway, but we've agreed that for nightclub and casinos, we won't even try. We'll also just show
some interior photos. As you can see, these are all vacant shells that we're waiting
for tenants. So we believe that this would be a benefit and would alleviate the difficulties
that we faced in finding tenants for these three units specifically. I have Kimberly
Venata with Asana Partners available to adopt my testimony as of her own.
Kimberly has been allowed to speak.
Hi, could you please state your name and spell for the court stenographer?
Yes, Kimberly, K-I-M-B-E-R-L-Y, Venata, V as in Victor, O-N-A-D-A.
Right. Do you swear for him to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, sir.
Please proceed, counsel.
Kimberly, have you heard my testimony a moment ago?
I did.
And would you agree that everything I stated is true and correct to the best of your knowledge, information, and belief?
That's right.
And do you agree to adopt my testimony as if it were your own?
I have no further questions for Ms. Bonata.
Questions from the board?
No, Mr. Chairman.
Questions or comments from our attorney, Hillary Anderson?
Not at this time, Mr. Chair.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
We have two hands up.
Nick Lombardi has been allowed to speak first.
Sir, could you please state your name and spell for the stenographer?
Hello, yes.
My name is Nicholas Lombardi.
That is N-I-C-O-L-A-S-L-O-M-B-A-R-D-I.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Are you a neighbor?
Correct.
I'm actually smack dab in the middle of this building.
Please proceed.
Please proceed.
So I really want to provide just some color around some of these provisos, if that's the
correct term, learning the language here.
So kind of from my perspective, being this close to it, in full disclosure, I am supportive
of this with the appropriate measures that ensure that there's no adverse impact to folks
such as myself who are in such close proximity to this building.
So the first of which being those uses around specifically takeout restaurants.
So I think if we look at it from a traffic perspective, restaurants that are delivery
centric. So thinking about on an extreme end, ghost kitchens or kind of down the scale to Uber
Eats, Grubhub, DoorDash, so forth, that would probably cause, I could certainly say it would
cause a undue burden around traffic in the neighborhood. There's no place to pull over.
There is no place to park short term. The garage, if that would be utilized in that capacity,
turns onto residential Howard Street, which there's a very short or tight turn radius,
I should say, as well as that turn being relatively blind and frankly being in front of my house.
So I see this all the time. I've seen vehicles be, you know, be struck because of those conditions and so forth.
So that would be one thing just around that sort of usage language in there.
The second being around hours.
So I know that the letter, the initial letter from South Kensington, I believe, stated a little bit shorter or a little bit earlier rather on.
I believe, stated a little bit shorter or a little bit earlier, rather, on those weekends.
However, I think if you look at it from the perspective of similar, well, I guess of the
proposed uses that Asana is mentioning, if you look at those sorts of uses, are those hours till
12 a.m. on weekends even necessary? If you look on Howard Street itself, you go down the street
to 1300 Howard Street, where you have Laser Wolf, that closes at 10 p.m., right? So I think having
that be until 10 p.m. on all nights is certainly in alignment with the location, as well as the
types of uses that they're proposing. And if it were to extend until 12 a.m., I think that there's
potential for additional burden from a noise perspective, from a vehicle traffic perspective,
again, parking garage and on the street, as well as foot traffic, where there really is not already.
From a monitoring maintenance security perspective, I know security was listed on there,
just to provide some color. There is no on-site presence today. There's some interior cameras.
There's no exterior cameras. Asana did state within this community benefits agreement to
provide commercially reasonable efforts to mitigate security concerns. That is something
that they've told us. They haven't actually done it. So I think that's something at minimum
installing those cameras as they've kind of stated that they would be needed. However,
I think when you kind of look past that, some of those photos, I think we're a little bit
illustrative of the lack of maintenance around the building, which again is something that we
as neighbors have really had to push them to engage with their providers on to ensure they're
keeping up with that, right? And I think if you could keep going down from a security perspective,
their existing tenant has been burglarized, vandalized numerous times, excuse me, as well
as their construction sites being burglarized numerous times as well. And that's not something
that's their problem. However, I think it is their purview to be able to actually do something to
mitigate that, you know, as far as the surrounding neighbors go. In addition, around the loading dock
for deliveries and contractor access, I believe it's already in the community benefits agreement
that they would limit their hours of deliveries from 8 a.m. to 6 p.m. However, I can say as
earlier, as recently as this morning, there was two large trucks making deliveries at 7 a.m.,
so obviously I'm concerned around their adherence to these terms to begin with, as well as, you know,
moving forward if we were to add additional ones. And I think from a trash perspective,
probably the last one on my end, that is something where I believe they have, I'm not positive about
this. However, I can state that they in the past had not had contracted trash services for their
daycare tenants. That tenant was putting those trash bags, you know, you can imagine the daycare,
the types of trash that you have loosely on the sidewalk, piled up, so forth and so on. And of
course, they were open, gotten into blocking Masher Street on that sidewalk there. So I think
those are some of the concerns in color. I just wanted to add from my perspective around these
provisos, if that is the correct terminology that are written up here. Okay. Thank you very much.
But you are in favor of the project? Provided that there are adequate, I guess, stipulations
that I just, I added some additional color to what's already here. Yes. All right. Thank you.
anyone else in the virtual audience rory sweeney is allowed to speak i could you say your name
please as bell for the stenographer absolutely rory sweeney r-o-r-y s-w-e-e-n-e-y do you swear
a firm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth i do are you a neighbor i am please
proceed uh i'd actually like to first start with a question for clarification is it the applicant's
testimony that they are accepting all of the provisos in uh skcp's uh letter um if not explicitly
uh through the this the the this zoning request but in general in some form or fashion either
through the uh the community benefits agreement or some other way or is is it more this letter
that you are now showing in front of us this letter which of which of those are you accepting
We are accepting all of them. The reason that they were actually more on this letter is because this actually, there were provisos that were initially granted back in or stipulations from December when the CMX2 uses were approved. So these were in addition to that. And yes, we have agreed in writing to all of, I'll pull it back up, but all of South Kensington Community Partners requested provisos.
Okay. So, because I have read that letter that you just showed, and I disagree that it is more, it is significantly less, and specifically, for example, does not include the parking validation concern, but what your testimony is that you are accepting all of these requests that they put into the letter.
requests that they put into the letter that is correct okay uh well i i suppose with that um i
That is correct.
i am also supportive in the same way that nick is uh i i don't i don't object to the uh to the uh
to do the the usage requests um on the grounds with the proviso that all of the things in the letter
are stipulated to and used.
Thank you.
Anyone else in the virtual audience?
No hands, Chair.
Planning Commission.
Thank you, Chair Berkman, Sarah Bond
with the Philadelphia City Planning Commission.
The comprehensive plan recommends no change
to the existing residential single-family zoning.
The property was previously granted a variance
for commercial mixed use.
There is a documented history of non-residential uses at the property, and the proposed use is consistent with that documented prior use.
The appellant has shown that the proposed uses will not cause detrimental impacts to the neighborhood beyond what might normally be expected.
The City Planning Commission recommends that the Zoning Board grant the special exception.
Thank you.
Hillary, you know, obviously they have that MOU.
I mean, did you hear anything at all that we'd want to put in a proviso?
um i honestly have to go back and look um because there was the letter and then there was the
agreement um and they they were um they were lengthy i know there was an hours of operation
um proviso in there that did stand out to me i can't remember if there was something related
to trash that was um enforceable um but if if it's the applicant's desire or the community's
are that we incorporate some things into the provisos, I would just have to take
a week to just look back over and see what's able to be incorporated.
The one that stands out on the top of my head is the hours of operation. So, Mr. Phillips, that's what
we're going to do. We're going to hold this until next week.
We will vote on it on
2 o'clock next Wednesday. And by that time, we'll go through
what we believe would be the appropriate provisos.
And, you know, obviously we would make sure that you know what we're doing before we do that.
Absolutely.
Thank you very much.
All right.
Thank you.
Cases closed other than that.
Is there anyone in the virtual audience who has a two o'clock case that has not been called?
I see no hands.
We're going to take a five minute break and then we'll come back for this 3.30 list.
Thank you, Chair.
Good afternoon. My name is Bill Bergman, and I will be chairing this afternoon ZBA hearing.
With me is our board member, Thomas Holloman.
Present, Mr. Chairman.
Our board member, James Snell.
Present, Mr. Chairman.
And also, LeBaron Leonard Palmer from the Division of Development Services will be serving as our alternate board member this afternoon.
Good afternoon.
Also, here is Hillary Emerson, our attorney, and our executive director, Tanya Sunken.
Here's our virtual format. Be advised the proceedings are being recorded.
Video will be available by contacting TanyaSunkett at philo.gov.
For the benefit of our court stenographer, we ask attorneys and witnesses to identify themselves before testifying.
If you're participating by phone and you wish to testify, press star 9 to raise your hand and star 6 to unmute.
To an appearance statement, call 267-270-5548.
Leave your email and the address of the property in question.
And finally, the question and answer box on the screen is not for comments or testimony.
All comments should be directed to our executive director, Tanya Sunken.
Let's look at our schedule for this afternoon.
Hold on a minute here.
Number four, MI 2023-002-478-1220-28-North Front Street. That case has been continued.
And number seven, MI 2023-006-622-1654-58-North 57th Street. That case has been continued. Attorney
moving party. Are there any other requests for continuance? Chair, we have Ayesha Lee with their
hand raised. They have been allowed to speak. Hi, could you please state your name and spell it for
the court stenographer? Hi, Ayesha Lee, A-Y-E-S-H-A-L-E-E. Right. Do you swear or affirm to
tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth? Yes. What case do you want to talk about?
we see the email saying that
We see the email saying that 401 East Roosevelt Boulevard, which was on a two o'clock, was going to be, the decision was going to be made today.
401 East Roosevelt Boulevard
which was
It was pushed from February 28th.
That was my last.
Hold on, let me see.
Hold on, ma'am.
We responded to your inquiry in the chat.
If you entered your appearance in that case, you will receive a copy of the notice of decision that was voted.
This case was voted at the top of the 2 p.m. list as Naton.
Thank you.
Any other requests for continuance?
Yes, Chair.
We have a Wendy Carter-Gomez.
They haven't allowed to speak.
Could you state your name and spell, please, for the court stenographer?
It's Wendy Carter-C-A-R-T-E-R-Gomez, G-O-M-E-Z.
Right.
Do you swear or form?
Wait a minute.
Wait a minute.
Do you swear for him to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
What case are you involved with?
MI-2023-006622.
What's the address?
1654 to 58 North 57th Street.
Hold on.
That case has been continued.
why was it granted a continuance because the attorney requested it and when will we get notice
of when the next when that's when that's filed again you will you will receive notice
okay thank you
i have several cases here that a few cases that have
No exhibits. Number one, MI-2023-000882-1167-69 Gerrit Street.
No exhibits. This is the second listing.
There's also a letter of opposition from Council Member Squill.
Ionis and Vasilis Harabombas owners.
Ionis, if you're an audience, please raise your virtual hand.
I see no hands.
So this is the second listing.
In November, the owners were trying to find an attorney.
So MI 2023-000882-1167-69 Garrard Street, I vote to dismiss.
Thomas Holloman, I vote to dismiss.
James Snell, my vote is to dismiss.
Thank you.
Number two, MI 2023-001-026-4253 Paul Street.
Enrique Garcia, this is the third listing.
There is a letters of opposition from the council person and also the community group.
and um miss l do we have a interpreter for this case as well
i didn't receive a response in the chat um or the q a announcing the interpreter was
present or response but if they're out there please raise your virtual hand
i'm sorry we see any hands no hands for enrique garcia nor the interpreter
early one i want to give this one more time to make sure that we in case we need an interpreter
yes mr sherwood market must be heard thank you mi2023 001 026 4353 hall street cases continuing
New York must be heard. And number three, MI-2023-002-469-624 Dudley Street. No exhibit, second listing.
There has...
Applicant stated that the R.C. they are not seeking a variance.
But we haven't heard from them, have we, Hillary?
No, we have not.
chelsea chelsea rusick is the owner applicant
chelsea rusick if you're in the audience please raise your virtual hand
no hands chair okay we're going to continue this one more time to see if we can't get a letter
where they don't want to um they're not seeking a variance anymore so am i
where they don't want to, they're not seeking a variance anymore.
So MI 2023-002-468-624 Dudley Street, this case is continued.
Mark must be heard.
Okay, so let's start our cases here.
Number five, MI-2023-005-999-1143-Wilder Street.
Tyler Hough is the owner applicant.
Carly Griggs is the owner, listed owner.
There's a letter not on me.
Hi. Mr. Huff, could you state your name, please, and spell it for the court stenographer?
Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman. Name is Tyler Huff, T-Y-L-E-R-H-U-F-F.
Great. You swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
You're the owner of this property, sir?
I am. My fiancé and I.
So this application is for the erection of an addition above the existing attached structure
with roof deck and roof deck access structure for use as a single-family household living.
An eight-foot minimum front setback when the store is above the second store is required
when the abutting lots of both sides contain only two floors.
A minimum rear yard depth of seven foot is required.
This is zero.
The minimum front setback for the roof deck is five feet.
This is zero.
and the maximum permitted height is 38 feet and 48 feet, six inches proposed.
Mr. Holloman has a few questions to ask, right?
Good afternoon, sir.
Did you email all the exhibits and documents as required five days in advance to this hearing?
Good afternoon.
Our revised package was submitted to Ms. Emerson just within the five days.
Thank you.
Please proceed and share your screen.
And just so you know, sir, there is a letter of non-opposition from Pachong Square and also a letter of non-opposition from Council Member Squilla.
You're coming. Yeah, good. Yep.
Can you see my screen?
I can. Yep, I can.
Okay, perfect.
So the first document that I have just lists our refusals. Again, the rear yard depth,
we do have a rear yard depth now. It's just about six feet. We will be shortening the first floor
of our house to create a symmetrical first floor. This will bring our rear yard to about just under
eight feet. So I think this satisfies that requirement. For the eight foot setback on the
third floor in the roof deck. We are seeking a special variance for this. And then the final
variance, it lists 45 feet, six inches. Our examiner took into accommodation the basement
measurements. So from above ground, our actual measurement is 39 feet, six inches.
So that will just be just over the 38 feet that is required. Okay. The second just shows again,
the property just from a side view you can see here that we will be cutting in the first floor
just to create more of a rear yard the side measurement here 39 feet six just shows from
the ground elevation up to the top of the pilot house and that's 39 feet six inches and then
again we're just doing the no front setback we want to keep the traditional modern or colonial
red brick look. This was presented to the community board. They voted in non-opposition
with the exception of a three and a half foot setback on the rear. Our original plans, our
third floor came out to butting against the second floor. This is a revised plan which
shows the third floor being set back three and a half feet. Again, this was just a letter
of non-opposition six to zero and then this is just a quick overview of our neighborhood
our property is circled in red just shows that you know we're not we're the first ones on our
block to do this just not the first ones in the community and then just the last one it's just a
quick front picture of the house again we're looking just keep this red colonial brick
and go up three stories with that and with that i will leave it open to questions
okay questions from the board no mr chairman no care questions or comments from our attorney hillary
Just briefly, Mr. Chair, in reviewing the revised plans and proviso form that Mr. Huff sent, it appears that there are two pages of revised plans that would need to be stamped if the board grants the variances.
Just briefly, Mr. Chair, in reviewing the
Thank you.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
I see no hands.
Planning Commission.
good afternoon chair members of the board my name is greg waldman planning commission staff
um could you do me a favor just for the record spell your name for the
stenographer absolutely the chair um my first name is gregory g-r-e-g-o-r-y
last name waldman w-a-l-d-m-a-n right do you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth
nothing but the truth i do please proceed sir a comprehensive plan recommends no change to the
residential single family zoning at this location the minimum rear yard depth appears to be an
existing site condition so this is supportable and the shallow lot depth also presents a hardship
should be a natural ability to increase living space in a single family home however roof decks
are not necessary to enable viable economic use of property so the planning commission recommends
the board grant the variance variances for rear yard depth and for minimum setback above the
second story but deny the dimensional variances related to the roof deck okay thank you
mr if you want to respond that
um i we would be willing to look at an adjustment um if necessary but our overall goal was to keep
everything um abutting on the front of the property thank you mi 2023 005 999 1143 wilder street
I vote yes, with proviso. Two plans stamped by ZBA on 4-10-24.
Thomas Solomon, my vote is yes, with proviso.
James Snell, my vote is yes, with proviso.
So you have your votes.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, members of the board.
Sure. Number six, MI 2023-006-615-1412-22, Fairmount Avenue.
We have an attorney for this.
Yes, Mr. Chair, an attorney has not been identified for this project. I do see someone with their hand raised.
Yes, Chair, we have three hands raised,
and Amanda Brawler has been allowed to speak first.
Could you please state your name
and spell for the court stenographer?
Hello. I'm actually the architect.
I believe Harriet also has a hand raised, and she is the lawyer.
I think she's going to start speaking.
Okay. Why don't we put her on?
Harriet Franklin has been promoted to panelists.
Hello?
Hello?
Could you state your name, please, and spell for the course stenographer?
Absolutely.
Harriet Franklin, H-A-R-R-I-E-T, F-R-A-N-K-L-I-N.
Right. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Could you identify your client and their relationship to the property?
Yes, absolutely. My client is Delaware Valley Community Health, the owner of the property.
Delaware Valley Community Health is a Pennsylvania nonprofit corporation and a federally qualified health center
that provides comprehensive primary care medical services
to communities located in both Philadelphia and Montgomery County.
All right, thank you.
Mr. Holloman has a few questions for you before you start.
Good afternoon, counsel.
Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to his accuracy?
Did you email all the exhibits and documents as required five days in advance to this hearing?
My client did, yes.
Thank you.
please proceed and share your screen um i'm sorry but i'm not in a position to be able
to share my screen but the architect who was also on um is able to share uh share the screen her
screen um why don't we do we'll bring her on she'll share the screen you'll testify
So why don't we do? We'll bring her on. She'll share the screen. You'll testify, okay?
Well, again, I'm not really in a position to testify. I'd like her to be able to explain
the exhibits because they are the ones that prepared them.
Excuse me, ma'am. Two issues. One, because the property is owned by a nonprofit, they have to
be represented before the board by an attorney. That means the attorney needs to give the
presentation you can call witnesses but you need to be the primary driver of the presentation
um the other issue is the deed that was submitted with the exhibit packet lists the owner of the
property as spring garden health organization a different entity than you just listed so if you
could provide clarification on that point that would be appreciated thank you yes okay well i
mean if um if the if the architect can share her screen then i could try my hardest to okay sure
the documents. As far as the owner, many, many, many, many, many years ago, Spring Garden was the
owner. The Spring Garden changed its name to Philadelphia Health Services and subsequently
changed its name to Delaware Valley Community Health. So it is the same owner. I suspect that
the problem is that the deed was not updated. We have documents in the record, I believe,
And I'm deferring to Brenda Robles-Cook, who is also involved on this presentation and available to speak, has provided in the materials the copies of the changes, amended articles of incorporation over the years.
Yes, I did see those in the presentation.
Thank you for connecting the dots there because I wasn't clear on the relevance.
Thank you.
Yep, absolutely.
So at this point, what we'll have is Amanda will go through it, and you'll testify off that.
And then if we have to, you'll call Amanda later as a witness, okay?
Okay, I'll try my hardest.
Well, I think you could do fine.
Amanda, could you put up the presentation?
Yes, I'm just seeing where to share my screen here.
Okay, I see it.
All right, well, we see you, but we, okay, thank you.
It's fine.
Perfect.
All right. So we are applying. No, no, no, no, no. Amanda. She has to testify. Oh, absolutely. I'm sorry. And if she has to, she'll call you later. Okay. Thank you.
So the idea behind this exception, as I best can explain, is that the building, there's a renovation to the building to accommodate its administrative staff.
The renovation hasn't happened for many, many, many years, and as part of the renovation, there's a special exception needed for purposes of creating a rooftop deck, which will be used and limited to its employees during lunchtime and breaks during normal business hours.
It's going to be approximately 750 square feet, and again, solely used by the employees of Delaware Valley Community Health.
It was, there are currently no outdoor space for its staff of approximately 110 people, and the deck was reviewed and approved by Spring Garden Civic Association.
Exactly what's on these plans, not being an architect, I'm not in a position to explain the detail, but I think there was one, if you go to another, the next slide, Amanda, if you don't mind, I think that you can see.
well that's the okay at the very bottom i think is where the um outdoor deck will go it will it
will be in between the the two buildings which delaware valley community health now owns and
connect them um again for the staff it won't be visible from the front of the building and uh it
this and apparently meets all of the setback requirements again i apologize because i'm not
the architect i i think you're doing well okay you're fine so the basic is you're redoing the
buildings you want to build a deck that people go out to at lunchtime and things like that
exactly sit between the two other buildings that you already own yes right oh okay um and no one
will be able to see it from the front and uh you know yeah i see a setback and things like that
okay yeah yeah questions from the board
Yeah, questions from the board?
No, Chair.
Thomas?
He's there.
Here, Tom, questions from the board.
You're muted, Tom.
Tom, you're muted.
no mr chairman thank you questions or comments from our attorney hillier emerson
not at this time mr chair questions or comments from the virtual audience yes chair we have three
hands up justina navarro has been allowed to speak hi could you please state your name and
spell it for the court stenography good morning good afternoon mr chair my name is justina navarro
J-U-S-T-I-N-O-N-A-V-A-R-R-O.
Right.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Do you live in a neighborhood?
I live actually on 15th, right around the corner.
Please proceed.
I'm in representation of the Spring Garden Civic Association, Mr. Chair, members of the board.
And we met with the applicant and we met with the architect virtually and the contractor.
They made a presentation.
The presentation was professional in nature, and the applicant answered all questions that the community had and members of the neighborhood had, as well as the zoning committee members of the project.
So as a result, we are in support of the project and we urge the panel, yourself, Mr. Chair, and the zoning board to approve the request as, to grant the request as submitted to the city today, to the ZBA today.
Thank you so much for your time today.
Thank you for taking the time to close.
We appreciate it.
Is there anyone else in the virtual audience?
Brenda has been allowed to speak.
Hi, could you please state your name and spell for the court stenographer?
Brenda, please unmute yourself.
I'm sorry.
No, it's okay.
Hi, could you state your name and spell for the stenographer?
My name is Brenda Robles-Cook, B-R-E-N-D-A-R-O-B-L-E-S-C-O-O-K-E.
I am. Hold on. Do you swear or affirm that tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Yes. Please proceed. I am the senior vice president and chief administrative officer
for this organization, and I'm here representing the owner of the property. I have been with the
organization for 28 years, along with using the use for having our staff go out. It's also a
retention um around um we have 20 vacant spots and we're hoping to get this outdoor space um to
give our staff a little bit more um offering more as a benefit to make them stay with dbch
thank you thank you thank you very much for taking this kind of calls we appreciate it
Is there anyone else in the audience?
I see no hands.
Planning Commission.
Greg, can you unmute?
Sorry.
That's okay, Greg.
It's okay.
Good afternoon.
This is Greg Walden, Planning Commission staff.
The comprehensive plan recommends no change to the existing commercial mixed-use zoning.
Proposed use will not cause detrimental impacts to the neighborhood beyond what normally might be expected.
City Planning Commission recommends that the zoning board grant the special exception.
Thank you.
MI 2023-006-615-1412-22 Fairmount Avenue, I vote yes.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes.
James Snell, my vote is yes.
Thank you, counsel. You have your votes.
Thank you very much. We really appreciate it.
Number eight.
MI 2023-007-020-508-14 Moore Street.
Darwin Beauvais is the attorney.
Also, Steve Masters is the attorney for the Protestants.
Garwin?
Darwin. Yes. Good afternoon, Mr. Bovet. Could you state your name, please spell for the court
Good afternoon.
sonographer? Yes. Darwin Bovet, B-E-A-U-V, as in victory, A-I-S, as in SAM,
counsel for the applicant, 3R Ventures, LLC. I'm located at 1500 Market Street, 34th floor.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Mr. Masters, could you state your name and spell for the court stenographer?
Good afternoon, Mr. Chair, members of the board.
Steve Masters, S-T-E-V-E, M-A-S-T-E-R-S.
I'm here for the objectors, neighbors for responsible development.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
So before we begin, Mr. Bovee, how long do you think you need to make your presentation?
And how many witnesses do you intend to call?
Actually, I intend to call our expert first, who I just need several minutes,
and because she actually has another zoning hearing to appear in front of.
Um, then I will call Bridget Daly, who is looking, who will lead up our, our, uh, operations.
And then, uh, we do have the head of the RCO, John Disley, uh, and we have the applicants who
will actually just adopt. Mr. Beauvais, you'll make a presentation yourself too.
Yes. I intend on making the presentation. So give me, give me an idea how much time you think
you need and then i'm going to ask mr masters you know maybe just i'm trying to estimate what
what's the time of your case and that would be including mr masters crossing i know you can
answer that but give me an idea where you how much time you think you need i i can make a presentation
in less than 20 minutes with all your witnesses or yourself with with at least with the witnesses
is to discuss the operations and our expert. I think the board should note that this is not
an addition to or new construction. It is just a use variance. So we can discuss the uses
in a streamlined fashion. I think Mr. Masters and his so-called clients are just looking to just
to stop the use.
What I want to try to do
before we get into what people
may want to do is the time.
And then I'm going to ask Mr. Masters
the same thing, okay?
So what do you think?
20 minutes you think you have all your witnesses?
I can speed things up
and do it in 20 minutes.
So Mr. Masters,
he mentioned experts.
He mentions people who are going to operate.
Just try to estimate for me
what you think the time of cross would be for you uh for the cross for his experts um
just one expert well and then you have people who want to talk about the operation of the place
right and then the owners right and then also the rco head so it could i was um i was thinking about
the time for my witnesses mr chair so i'm thinking i know but i want to figure out him
first it could be 15 to 20 minutes for for across of all of of all of darwin's witnesses okay
all right um what what we're trying to figure out mr masters we know that you have five witnesses
we're trying to think if we if we're going to get to them today or not and what what i what's
the matter mr povek um one the couple of things with with that line of thinking i think in a
normal situation, I wouldn't mind. But I think I have to object to him presenting any witnesses,
especially as expert. But two, one of the reasons why we were this add-on was that
this project will not happen if we don't get a decision today. So we were just trying to figure
out what would be the best way. If the board could recall, we appeared in front of the board
on March 6th, and at the request of the councilman, we agreed to a continuance, and we did discuss
how quickly we can get back in front of the board because of our deadline. If we cannot get a
decision by the end of the month we uh that we might as well withdraw our application and that's
And that's and I hope we I don't I don't know that we're going to get to a decision today.
and and i hope we but well i
Now, I'm not sure about rescheduling and things like that.
I'll check. But I don't believe that we can get through this today.
And that's why I'm trying to, you know, do what's right by everybody.
You know, if Mr. Masters has witnesses, you know, that that are going to be waiting and then we get to the point when it's his turn.
there's no time left i mean i i gotta put a timeline on this i mean you know and i and i just
um and mr chair i want to say earlier today and while you were in proceedings so you may not have
seen the flurry of emails that were exchanged back and forth i think someone's mentioned it
to me a little bit i think hillary i think hillary saw it i think hillary saw them all i'm i'm
confident of that because she's on the ball with everything um so uh we for the record um while
i have been known from time to time to prolong proceedings and in favor of objectors i have not
done that in this case we have not objected to any of the expedited um dates that that um darwin
has asked for. We did, though, spend a considerable amount of weeks that we outlined
in our correspondence with you looking for an expert. And we had quite a... It was one of the
more unusual kinds of searches for experts that I've ever had, and it's because this is a very
specific use this 3.1 3.5 residential substance use disorder treatment facilities and virtually
every expert that we interviewed or we encountered felt that they were conflicted out of testifying
because they were themselves part of a rival provider and they didn't want to seem to be
complaining about a newcomer and and you know that they were fighting over the same clients
The other people that we had pursued were at one point available because they had worked for the state general assembly, but they went back into the Shapiro administration and they were conflicted out because they were.
Steve, I understand what you were looking for, and I knew one of the subpoenas of somebody, and we turned it down, but what I want to do is get through today and figure out where we are.
And the way I see this is, you know, even if the expedited time we just talked about, we're past six o'clock, and I don't think we have time to put on Steve's case then.
That's where we are.
And I'm saying that now because I don't want Steve holding witnesses here.
Mr. Masters holding witnesses here.
And then they're not going to go on.
It's just not where we want to be.
So what I think we want to do today is, Darwin, you put your case on, Mr. Master's crosses, and the next time we get together, Mr. Master does his case.
It will have to be this month.
Well, I will talk to Tanya and we'll figure it out.
And I just, if you, Steve, if you would also let me know what you think the length of your
case would be.
Yeah, sure.
I am more prepared on that question, Mr. Chair.
So, yes.
So, Mike Harrell, I believe that his testimony is going to be very extensive.
And I imagine that Mr. Bovee's cross-examination will also be somewhat extensive.
So I don't see him having direct and cross-examination any shorter than an hour.
And we do have four witnesses who are among my clients, who are the near neighbors, and they all have unique areas that they want to bring forward.
One of them has a PowerPoint presentation that may itself take 10 to 15 minutes.
And so I would imagine that the other a total of the other four witnesses would be between 30 to 40 minutes.
So we're talking about an hour and 40 minutes.
So why don't we do this? We're going to start today.
Darwin, you'll put on your case. Mr. Masters will have an opportunity to cross.
And then the next time we get there, Mr. Masters does his case.
And that's fine with the understanding that we have to do this this month because.
My understanding would be is we'll do what we can.
I can't answer that question now.
Then I also would like the board to consider a break because with the flurries of emails all day up to up until just an hour ago.
Then I also would like the board to consider a break because with the flurries of emails.
But I completely object to him presenting any witnesses given the length of time.
Well, he's not doing it today. He's not doing it today.
i i understand right but i still want my objections to be noted because i and i'm
hoping that the board can rule on it prior to time prior to like let me finish let me finish
i'm sorry that i interrupted prior to time because what i have sensed at the time that we
even started that um and even with the good councilman's help that mr masters was representing
neighbors who wanted to be more involved and review the cba or more on an individual and
private basis than what the rco did we do have executed cba and then as it turns out the now
Now, the neighbors didn't even give us language, and they just changed their mind.
And I think it does come into play with Mr. Masters' inability to get an expert, because I do believe there are other people who are watching this case who would rather not see this case, see this activity here.
Okay, so why don't we do this? Mr. Masters, your witnesses, you can let them go for the day, right? And we're going to, Darwin, you'll start, and we'll get through your case today, and Mr. Masters will cross, and then we'll figure out where we stand in the future.
Very briefly, Mr. Chair, I wanted to put on the record a response to Mr. Bove's objections. As you said, Mr. Chair, his objections are now going to be moot because his objection was that he didn't see our expert outline and he didn't know about the identity of our other witnesses within four or so days before the hearing.
Now he's going to be able to see them many more days than that before the next hearing.
But it was very concerning to us and basically shocking that Mr. Bovee was asking this board to completely shut down any objectors from making any testimony.
And it was it was just it was very, very shocking and frankly, un-American.
and i've never seen i've never seen i've never seen that kind of emotion all right thank you so
why don't we do this mr bobe yes why don't we start your case yes i i i will i will and and
and i still don't know who your clients are steve so i'll share my screen
Uh, if I think of this.
Can you see?
No, we don't see anything, Darwin.
Hey, Argo.
It's coming up.
You've got a bunch of email.
You've got messages you're putting up here.
You might want to.
That's not bad.
There we go.
There we go.
You can see that, right?
Oh, we can't.
Okay, great.
All right.
Mr. Chairman, members of the board.
My name is Darwin Beauvais.
And before you is an application for 3.1 level type recovery house to be located in our RSA
5 Residential District in the Dickerson Square section of South Philadelphia. Like I mentioned
earlier, we have the applicant, 3R Ventures, LLC. The principals include Michael Daly and Harvey
Schmidt. Also, we have to discuss operations. It's Bridget Daly. And also, because time is of the
essence we do have our expert courtney what what we'll we'll
We do have our expert, Courtney Woldalowski, and she'll better pronounce her name.
She's an expert, and I'll bring her on in just a minute.
In just a minute, I just want to give the board some quick background.
A 3.1 level recovery house is the essence of our application.
Our intent is to have 56 residents.
Our original intent is also to include the required number of parking spaces, to which I'll explain in a few.
This combined site, and if possible, let me see.
Can the board see this?
We can.
All right.
The combined site is 23,000 square feet with a three-story building and two existing lots.
You can see my cursor hovering around the building and my cursor now hovering around the lot.
Just here's an overview.
Here's the building on Moore Street.
And here are two lots adjacent that belongs to the applicant.
Well, belongs to the project.
so our applicant our application right now doesn't include any additions and it's just
internal renovations we intend to use the three floors to create living space with a main commercial
kitchen and ground on the ground floor meeting spaces and a fitness center like i mentioned
before, the program will be owned by the applicant, which we have Michael Daly and Harvey
Smith. And at this time, I just want the board to see Exhibit 11, our prior permits, just
to give you further background.
this was the home for the elderly and aged this has this property has always focused on group
living and and it was as recently and currently owned by the
i'm sorry i'm just going to object briefly um darwin because while it's true that it was group
living at some points in its time the property is not historically a group living property and you
you need to show the documents my presentation okay so and this was owned by the mother of good
council for several years and it is now owned by the taoist temple
now we did receive a special exception as well as a refusal
the board can see here group living and i believe what mr masters was trying to uh orient the board
was that our the place has been vacant for quite some time and therefore it needs to get the
It's zoning classification refreshed, if you will.
Now, with this, I do want to discuss what is called a low-intensity residential treatment facility.
And I think because of time she has to go, we will call Courtney Wondolowski.
If she could raise her hand.
Courtney has been allowed to speak.
I would you please state your name and spell for the courts and honor.
Hello, everyone.
Yes, it is Courtney Wondolowski.
There we go.
C-O-U-R-T-N-E-Y-W-A-N-D-E-L-O-S-K-I.
You swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Please proceed, counsel.
Thank you.
You've stated your name for the record.
Can you tell the members of the board what kind of work do you do?
Yes, I'm the co-founder of Revive Behavioral Health Solutions. We are a women-owned behavioral
Yes, I'm the co-founder of Revive Behavioral Health Solutions.
health consulting firm that works with programs nationally to help them navigate state licensing,
national accreditation, as well as insurance credentialing, in addition to policy and
procedure development, compliance guidelines, and natures around setting up successful and
ethically run treatment centers related to behavioral health care.
Okay. And have you, in your experience, put together 3.1 level treatment care,
can you tell the board what that entails? Yes, of course. So every state has different
guidelines when it comes to 3.1 facilities, but as you mentioned, Darwin, 3.1s are low-intensity
residential clinically managed programs for substance use disorder, and we have helped
programs get licensed and set up proper procedures as it relates to running and operating the level
3.1 programs. Okay, and how many, and how long have you been doing this? Yeah, so, oh, sorry.
Yeah, how long have you been doing this, either through your current firm or throughout your
career? Of course, so I have been in the behavioral health field now for over five years. I started
with owning and operating a behavioral health recruiting firm where we helped the staffing
for many 3.1 and other levels of residential care.
For the last three years, we have kind of started into the consulting side of things.
And I would say in that period of time, we have helped open dozens of programs.
but as it relates to 3.1s, I would say between 8 and 12.
Great. Mr. Chairman, I offer her as an expert,
and I'd like to continue my questioning about this particular project.
I'm sorry. I have an objection to the certification as an expert.
could I ask Mr. Chair could I ask one or two questions to illustrate why I believe
that this witness is not an expert please I'm sorry can you can you pronounce your last name
for me yes it is Courtney Wondoloski Wondoloski okay so Miss Wondoloski
uh you stated in your testimony that um every state has different uh regulations and criteria
for 3.1 uh residential facilities is that correct so in terms of state licensing each state licensing
body operates different in terms of kind of the licensing process but 3.1 is a
level of care by ASAM, which is the American Society of Addiction Medicine. So 3.1s operate
across the board following ASAM standards. So the operations don't differ across the board
while the state licensing might have different requirements in terms of what needs to
be submitted. The overall operations as it relates to what is expected at a level 3.1
does not differ. How many 3.1 facilities have you assisted in the state of Pennsylvania?
I have not assisted with any in the state of Pennsylvania, but I've done extensive...
Excuse me, I just need to go on. Have you done any training with the state of Pennsylvania
in licensing of 3.1 facilities in this state? I've not done training, but I've been in communication
with them extensively and i have extensive emails back and forth with the process and emailed with
people but you haven't trained in the state licensing procedures correct i was not aware
there was training if there was i would have sure done that but i have gotten all the information
from the appropriate uh bodies within the state of pennsylvania in terms of the process and what
is needed and um that is the information that i have have you ever operated a 3.1 facility
so i my business does not own any 3.1 facilities but we provide operational support so yes we have
provided operational support to didn't ask you if you provided operational support i asked you
if you have ever operated a 3.1 facility well i have i have made i have made clear that i don't own
Well, I have made clear that I don't own any.
Right. Have you ever been employed at a 3.1 facility?
No, but I have worked with them extensively.
So, Mr. Chair, the expert that we have has operated 70 3.1 and other residential treatment facilities, not just in Pennsylvania, but also in Maryland.
where we're missing. Hold on. Hold on. Hold on. So I'm challenging her status.
Both of you listen a minute. Darwin, did she work on this project?
Unmute Darwin, please. Darwin. Unmute. Darwin, has she worked on this project?
So here's where we are.
I'm not going to make her a witness.
You can let her testify as what she's done on this project.
I'm not going to make her an expert witness, but she can testify as to what she's done on this project.
So, Courtney, are you still there?
Yes, I'm here.
So can you explain, based on your time in working on this project, did you see that there was a need for a 3.1 level care facility in this city?
Based on my research, I did not see many 3.1 levels of care within Philadelphia, which is why I thought it made good sense to open one.
Okay. And in helping the applicant in trying to open one, you did interact with both state and city officials, correct?
Correct.
Okay. Now, with that, did they indicate that there was additional 3.1 facilities in the city?
i'm sorry i'm objecting to hearsay
my i i for for i i i do i think we want to do is she's to say what she did she can't say what
somebody told her so why don't we concentrate on what she did to help this project get to where it
is important in your efforts to help the client that you you're you're a you have conducted
research correct correct extensive research and your research has concluded that there are no
3.1 facilities in the city correct objection now you're testifying for her and no I'm not
i'm asking her a question steve what let her answer that question okay but it was a leading
question i understand i understand fine so based on my research i could not find any other 3.1s
in philadelphia but it is difficult to determine to categorize what each residential my research
showed that there were 3.5s and above, and I was not able to locate any 3.1s with my research that
I conducted. Understood. All right. No questions at this time, but I do reserve the right to bring
her back. I understand. Steve? Yes. Hey, Ms. Wondolowski, you testify that you were meeting
with um with officials at the state and the local level is that correct
you just said she couldn't talk about that because it was here no i asked i asked if she met with
them i have met uh with the local councilmen via uh zoom and then the rest of my correspondence
has been for research purposes with the different government entities that oversee
licensing via email. Is that on the state level, those government entities?
So it was DDAC, which is the Department of Drug and Alcohol Prevention, I believe,
DDAC within Pennsylvania. And I would have to check my records as it relates to the city level.
But I have communicated via email to following the process that is on Pennsylvania state's government website as it relates to opening up projects like this.
And in those in your in your communications and research, did you happen to talk to people about asking for a contract to.
did you happen to talk to people about um asking for a contract to get referrals of clients
objection that is beyond the scope of the questioning to ask for a contract
steve wonder i think we're gonna i i okay let's cut let's concentrate on what she testified
across on where she was and things like that i think i guess i just i just then just to clarify
fine, Mr. Chair. Ms. Wondoleski, as you're here today testifying, are you aware of any
agencies in the city of Philadelphia that want to contract with this facility to provide
either clients or funding through Medicaid? He just asked if she knows if the city's position,
that objection
I agree
Steve I agree
then I'm
I'll like
reserve for
next witness
Darwin
yes I would like to call
Brittany I mean Bridget
and before
as she's getting
on the call. I'm here, Darwin. Could you state your name, please, and spell for the
stenographer? Yes. Good evening, everyone. My name is Bridget Daly. I'm spelled B-R-I-D-G-E-T-D-A-L-E-Y.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do, sir.
Ms. Daley, I understand you're going to be the one leading operations for the program.
I have on the screen Exhibit 7, which includes floor plans.
Right now, I'm showing what is being identified as the ground floor.
Can you tell me what's going on here?
And, Mr. Chairman, what I want to do, I just want to go over what the physicality of the program will look like, and then we can talk about hours of operation, staffing, and the like.
So, Ms. Daley, what are we looking at here?
Yeah, absolutely.
Thank you so much, Darwin, and thanks for everybody that's staying on late this evening.
And so, what you're looking at at this point is the ground level floor, right?
And so it may be helpful to think from the top to the bottom in this moment, but the
upper levels of the floor will be places where people are living, right, and sleeping, right?
And the big part, yeah.
Bridget, Bridget, if you can see the screen, I just want to, because I'm actually going
from the ground up.
Oh, okay.
Opposite way.
I wasn't sure if we were going to go all the way.
So yeah.
So looking at the bottom floor.
So obviously there are people in residential treatment.
This is a residential treatment facility at a 3.1 level of care.
So this ground floor is where folks are going to be able to eat.
There's a kitchen in that bottom area where the cursor is that Darwin is moving around for me so lovingly.
And then up above that is the area where folks can eat and congregate.
And obviously, when they're in treatment, they still need to be fed.
And then as we look at going down the hallway, there are a couple areas of group rooms, right?
So right there, I think it's hard to see if you want to move in a little bit, Darwin.
But I do see on the upper right, there is a group room, right?
So obviously, like folks would be coming in there to be both in community with each other.
A big part of addiction treatment is community with one another, right?
Right. As well as having, you know, their their facilitation of group therapy, group talk therapy.
Right. If you see in that lower right where Darwin's moving around, that is an area where the you know, it's hard for me to read the things, but I know that that is for office spaces.
Right. And for like smaller group therapy sessions on the left, you see the office to office spaces in my vision.
And in my mind here, there's always a space for admissions, those nice referrals that Steve, Mr. Masters was speaking of, right?
People get referred to our facility and they have to have admissions.
And then up in that area is a smaller office, right, where an individual therapist would have their own office to be able to talk to folks.
Okay. And on the second floor?
Yeah, as we go up here, starting from the bottom, you see...
Yeah, as we go up here, starting from the bottom, you see some of the residential areas, right? So there are a couple beds that are going to be on that floor, you know, most of them being on a higher level of floor, but there are going to be some beds in this area.
Obviously, as you can see, what I think is really incredible and really nice that there's bathrooms for everybody, you know, people deserve to live with dignity as well. Over there, there is a classroom setting kind of set up in terms of another group room, right?
Again, a big part of 3.1 facilities are group therapy, right, and group talk therapy.
As you see over there is another office that would be a primary office for a primary therapist.
Those are oftentimes the people that help run groups but have individual therapy with the patients and clients.
And as we go up, there is more and more bets for folks to have comfortable living quarters.
And as well as like you'll see, again, bathrooms and spaces for them to kind of be around and hang out.
Again, just because they're in addiction treatment doesn't mean they don't deserve dignity.
And then again, on the top floor, again, there is also more spaces for residents to live, as well as the middle section there where they can have a little bit more space to kind of congregate and hang out.
Kind of maybe a kitchen area like a fridge.
So they come back from work.
Maybe they they have a sandwich they want to save for tomorrow and they're able to put their sandwich in there and they don't have to go to all the way to the bottom floor of the kitchen.
Great, great, great, great. So thank you for giving us what the physical operations will look like.
Some basic questions to start. How many employees are you intending?
So the ratio that we are, you know, obviously like committing to is seven to one for resident, right? But that's the ratio of like staffing in terms of, you know, actual groups and things like that. It does not include like the security officer that we're going to need. But seven to one is the ratio to clients.
Okay. And what is the hours of operations or how, describe to me what the facility, will it be accessible? Will staff be there just on a nine to five basis?
is? No, they'll be staffed there 100% of the time, 24 hours a day, right? Obviously,
staffing overnight when a lot of the residents are sleeping and they're in their beds might be a
little bit less, right? But there will be security there to supplement in that moment. But during the
day, it's a full moving treatment facility, right? So there's staff that needs to staff
the patients and clients that are in there. There's also the staff in terms of the therapists
and those types of clinicians in behavioral health, right?
And as well as like admin staff, front desk admissions, things like that.
But there'll be someone on site all 24 hours a day.
I mean, that's part of a treatment facility.
It's not that you just lock them up at night and you see them the next day, right?
Obviously, the folks need to be monitored and supported through this difficult time
in their lives, right?
That's great.
So you mentioned security.
Tell us about how that works.
Absolutely.
So, you know, we have decided to work with a camera system and AI technology, as well
as having a on-site security officer.
The AI technology helps us monitor with 14, I believe is what our decision is, around
cameras on the outside perimeter, as well as inside areas of the property, right?
Right. A security officer is also going to be there. Right. A big part of, you know, we're just talking about operations and timing is that residents are not supposed to be out and about after 11 p.m.
Right. That is like the the there's often a curfew that people have to abide by. Right.
And so both with our staff that will be there, as well as security officers, as well as the technology, that's how we keep track of that. Right.
People sign in and sign out, you know, and we have again, we're really trying to provide behavioral medicine and treatment for substance abuse here.
Right. So we're not a fan of people kind of being out till four in the morning, if you know what I'm saying.
And so ideally, like that's not ideally, but actually impractically, that is that is what's going to happen, you know, that we'll be monitoring it.
But again, we'll also be hiring a security officer to be on patrol, and we can ensure that there'll be staff as well to support in those instances.
Okay, so let me talk to you about, there was some talk when we were dealing with, excuse me, the RCOs about a zero tolerance policy.
a zero tolerance policy. Can you explain that to me? Yeah, absolutely. So, you know, at the end of
Can you explain that to me?
the day, one of the biggest things that we're going to prioritize as an organization is the
safety and including that the sobriety of our clients, right? And so, you know, we know that
if one person decides to go out and unfortunately use drugs, right, that they can't stay in our
facility, right? They actually have to go to potentially get detoxed or have medical work
done. And that's not something we actually provide. So in the 3.1 level of care, usually how
the referrals and things work is from either 28-day standard, what most people on this call
might think of in terms of rehab or substance abuse disorder facilities. 28 days, they refer
to us. So these people or detox centers that do medically assisted treatment in that moment
to help taper people off potential opioid or alcohol abuse, and then they're referred to us.
So at that point, they're not taking on any medically assisted treatment, right? And so for
us, we're going to be drug testing continuously. There's always random drug tests, as well as when
people, you know, like if there's anything that like is afoot, right, that like staff are worried
about, people will be drug tested instantly. And that's something that is pretty standard and
all 3.1 facilities is to continuously drug test. And again, if someone is using, we can't have
them in our facility for the protection of our other clients, right? It's not just necessarily
like a rule, we want to kick you out, good luck. It's about the protection of the other clients
in the facility. Understood. Understood. So in other words, there's no methadone.
this is not a methadone clinic and, and there are no drugs exchanged at all, whether it's for
their benefit. Correct. So we actually, we cannot like turn people away if they're on suboxone or
methadone or other medically assisted treatments, but we do not provide that care. We're not giving
them, we're not giving them those doses, right? It's not a methadone clinic that people are rolling
up to get their take homes for the weekend. Right. It's a treatment facility that includes group
therapy, individual therapy. And those are all things that are actually required by different
states for a 3.1 facility is a certain amount of hours of care. Right. And so that's it's it's
the goal here is that actually people coming to this facility have a few days under their belt.
Right. In terms of removed from drugs. Right. And that's where a big need that folks have
in terms of recovery, as a person that is in long-term recovery myself, you know, a lot of
folks can't kick a habit in 28 days or three days in detox, right? And so this provides a longer
term level of care for people that are already removed from the drugs. Okay. So the type of
residence that you would include, even though the zero tolerance policy, that there's no active,
no active mem uh you're not looking for anyone convicted of violent offenses correct
no um and we'll also be screening for sex offenders and and other issues like that so
you know again in in my mind that is about keeping our residents safe right and our clients as well
because in this moment they become members of the community as well right we want to keep our
community members around the corner safe and we also want to keep all the patients safe as well
And what about the, well, let's just talk about how would appointments, how do you intend, or will there be a van service?
van services to doctor's appointments or two different yeah so that that's again pretty normal
for any 3.1 facility um or um treatment facility that if you know when i was in treatment i had a
specialty doctor appointment i had to go uh to a special doctor at upenn actually and when i was
traveled there someone took me in a car right it took me in a van and that's pretty normal so like
For folks that are using medically-assisted treatment or, you know, sometimes you have a doctor's appointment, right, things like that, there will be transport vans.
And those vans also will transport folks to meetings in the 12-step programs and fellowships that are around to be able to allow people to expand their recovery networks.
Great.
Great, great, great.
um at this time oh let's let's talk about community service and contributions to to the
community what's your intention yeah I think that that's like a really incredible part of
Yeah, I think that that's like a really incredible part of when you get into recovery, right? You want to owe amends to the community around you. And so, you know, our plan is to work with some of our folks that we've met through this awesome process within the RCO that have businesses in the area that have a kitchen and corner store, right?
when you get into recovery
recovery.
like you know not too far um from the last community meeting right and and allow folks to
to be able to give community service hours and and support the community in the area right um
when i was in treatment something that we did was we planted flowers right at a a nearby hospital
um we also worked with a dog shelter right like these are all options and things that we can offer
to our clients um there's not many things that we can like absolutely make them have to do in terms
of like part of their program of treatment but you know i found that lots of folks really want
to be involved in this because they do want to show amends to their community that they're in
okay um at this time no no further questions but i do miss the masters um yes okay um
Um, Ms. Daly, how many, uh, you first were testifying about the floor plan, um, and you
were identifying certain rooms that you said were group therapy rooms and certain rooms that you
said were small group therapy rooms. And then was there one room that you said was an individual
therapy room? No, there was two. There was one on the lower floor and there was one upstairs. Um,
And I think one of the smaller group rooms can also be converted into, like, I think
the way the plan looks, it can be converted into an individual therapy room as well.
So you're aware that this is a halfway house.
Would that be, is that correct?
No, that is incorrect.
Halfway houses have a different jurisdiction and recovery houses are definitely very different
than 3.1 treatment facilities.
Are you aware that the residents of this house are going to be outside and away from the
house during the day yeah absolutely that's we encourage that that they should be able to go to
work and be productive members of society and how are they going to get to work so for them i mean
we're in the city of philadelphia we have this great thing called septa and i think that you
know folks can get to work they can walk in the community um you know again a facility that i
went to people walk down the street to the walmart or to the the wawa right and things like that you
know. So the residents, the clients that have cars, when they come to your facility, your policy is
going to be that they're not allowed to have those cars. Is that correct? Yeah, they're not allowed to
bring their cars. At this moment, we don't have parking for them. And I, you know, we don't want
to create the hindrance on the community in terms of parking. I know parking in Philadelphia is a
crazy thing. So you're feeding them only breakfast and dinner, or you also feed them lunch? So the
way it usually works in a facility like this is that there's I'm not asking you how it usually
works I'm asking you for this facility when are you feeding them and where are the cooks
I'm objecting that is not a zoning issue right how are you feeding them we just showed there's
a kitchen we didn't well there was no testimony that any cooks or any food personnel just showed
there's a kitchen where where are you personnel we just showed there's a kitchen okay that is
i objected to that right i i mean i i i think one of the things that he talked about steve mr
masters is about are people going out on a daily basis right i think the question he said was
are they going to eat lunch does anybody eat lunch there i i don't think that's a bad question
yeah i think i can answer to that i mean yes i agree that this is part of the operations which
doesn't really have a lot to do with the zoning but if people are going to be fed there yeah like
i think that the truth is is that again how it usually works in these facilities and we're at
the point where we're figuring this out because we're in the process of getting zoned if i to
remind you we you know we offer like snacks and things for the the residents to to have a lot of
residents that are on Medicaid or on other types of government assistance also receive food stamps,
right, the SNAP benefits. So they're allowed to purchase their own food, label it, which is,
again, common practice, and leave it in the facility. And they can also cook, right? Like,
again, like, just because they're addicts doesn't mean they're not capable of taking care of
themselves in that way. So let me just keep going forward. Ms. Daly, you are going to be
the operational manager of the facility or are you a temporary person in my my intent
mr masters is to be involved in this project from now
Mr. Masters, is to be involved in this project from now, as I have been, till foreseeable future,
right? You know, this project was inspired by my own story. I'm still talking, sir. I'm actually
trying to answer your question. Wait, wait, wait. Stop, stop, stop. Yeah.
Miss Daly, just answer the question. Yeah. And that's what I want you to do. Try to listen to
what he said and listen to if darwin objects then he objects and we'll figure it out but but i don't
want you going off on anything other than what he asked you absolutely so my question are you
are you the director of this facility because in the materials in your exhibit binder it says that
those positions are to be determined and that they're not assigned to you so that wasn't your
initial question but if you want to switch it to this question i'm happy to answer
is that you're now your question are you saying am i going to be you're not your role isn't to
ask me questions your role is to respond to my question she can ask for clarity sir
do you need me to repeat the question yeah go ahead okay the question is in your exhibit binder
it says that the director of the facility is to be determined you testified earlier that you are
the director of the facility which one is it so currently right now courtney um wandalowski who
you guys met earlier, is the interim director of the facility. Her entire job in this moment
as we're building to the facility is not only to get us supported, get us into a place where
she can, where we can operate in a functional and safe way. But after that, we are going to be
looking for a full director, right? In this moment, I can say that I'm going to be involved
in the project. But whether my position is director or something else, I can't give you
the Answer Masters. Your attorney said that you, to quote him, he said you will be leading the
operations. Is that not correct? Yes, but that's not the same as being a director. Okay. So you
are going to be a leader in operations. So tell us which other facilities you have been a lead
operator in before today. None. Have you ever been trained to be an operator of a 3.1 facility?
no okay um the hours of operation you're you're proposing how many hours per week of therapy to
each client that is aligned there's like an actual legal amount that has to be offered
are you asking about group therapy i'm asking if you know what the legal amount is and if you can
tell me whether you're at the bare minimum or if you're actually accentuating it to give them more
more therapy than they're than you're required to go i i'm kind of objecting to this because
that's asking a medical treatment question that is not her position so that it's dealing with
operations she will facilitate a medical officer a medical therapist to come in and and and that
therapist could could could explain that clearly so i object to that question well so so mr masters
i i agree with that i i mean i think we gotta just stay focused here on okay so miss daly you
do you know uh what the requirements are for 3.1 licensing in the state of pennsylvania
i'm not a medical doctor so that's not my wheelhouse no but i wasn't asking you about
the therapy. I was asking you for the licensing requirements. Are you familiar with what's
required of personnel at a facility? He is asking, are you at the level to give licensing,
to feed them, and to give them medical treatment? It's still the same type of question.
I think I but I hear your objection, but I think he can say, you know, do you do you know how how you're going to operate this?
Right. If you're leading operations, do you know what the operational requirements are from the state for this facility?
If she knows. Yeah. So I'm one of the people that would be leading operations. Right.
And what I'm trying to say is that I'm not a medical doctor and different people's needs change. Right.
the bare minimum for the state of Pennsylvania is certain hours of group therapy, certain hours
of the individual therapy. Right. And so for me though, that doesn't always cut it. And some
folks need to take more and it drops down oftentimes over, over time that people are in a
facility. Right. So our goal is going to be have a comprehensive facility that treats our patients
on a like case by case basis. Right. Like someone might need five individual therapy sessions.
someone might need three wait a minute wait a minute wait go ahead steve um you are gonna have
Go ahead, Steve.
You are going to have, you want up to 56 clients in this facility.
Is that correct?
And how many contracts have you been negotiating for referrals for this facility?
I'm glad you asked.
Yeah, go ahead, Derwin.
no i don't understand the relevance of this because it's it's he's basically
trying to present to the board by wearing a chicken and an egg situation you know
darling you can make a little bit let me i think there's a legitimate i think he's saying
you got 56 people you want where are you going to get them from i i think that's what he said
I need to know whether you, if you're leading operations, is that something that you know about? Is there someone else who can come on to this hearing and tell us where you're going to be getting your clients from? Are they going to be Medicaid clients? Are they going to be self-pay? Are they going to be from some other insurance?
I want to understand where these people are coming from, who they are, how many of them are involved in the criminal justice system.
And I want to know how you're how you're planning to fund this this program and who's going to pay for the for your services.
Yeah, if she knows, if she knows. Yeah, I can give a little bit of answer to that.
Like I'll say one, a three point one facility is only Medicaid just to make it clear for you.
There's no like three point one is Medicaid. It's only through Medicaid.
patients, right? We already have a contract written down and actually signed, but obviously
we need a facility first to be able to get some of these more contracts, and there'll be months
and months of renovations. But we do have a contract already with the American Treatment
Network. American Treatment Network in Haverford or Havertown? Yes.
So the contract, can you produce a copy of that contract for us?
objection what's the objection how do we know you know what you know why here's the objection
because right we sent a letter of support that they sent to councilman squilla right
evidencing that there is an agreement between american treatment center and this facility
so that that that should suffice it's well i'm well well i'm not giving you what our
When our witness comes in, we'll figure out how this facility could possibly receive Medicaid funding unless they have a contract not with American.
And again, I further my objection because you're getting into federal dollars that should not be before the board.
So I agree that we don't have to see where every dollar is.
I think his questions about where the people are coming from, how you're going to run the day-to-day operations are legitimate questions.
So why don't we see if we can't move on?
And I believe her testimony said American Treatment Network will be funneling patients.
And she said they have a contract.
yeah okay so this daily um is your contract with american treatment centers that they're going to
produce 56 people up to 56 when you get up to your full capacity or is there a lower number
that you're contracting with them so um i apologize i'm just going to say this it's not
contracting like they're they're we're selling cattle here right it's something that we can
have patients be referred to us, but it's not like a one-for-one situation. I can speak to what
our plans are if we are approved to how we're going to get other patients to fill the 56 beds.
Sure. Yeah. So a lot of that is often done with networking and working with other treatment
facilities. So there are, I can't give you the number right now. Courtney was still on. I know
as she could. There are multiple detox centers in the city of Philadelphia. As we know, there's
a large opioid crisis that is hitting the city of Philadelphia. And so there's a lot of detox
centers, right? And there's a lot of hospitalizations. Again, we don't- Can I pause?
So the detox centers, you're talking about outpatient services, right? No, that's not
what a detox center is. You're talking about residential 3.5s? No, that's not what I'm speaking
of. I'm talking about when you go to get detoxed, medical detox, when you go into a hospital.
Okay. All right. So like, so crisis kind of like that.
Yeah. There's, there's many,
there's many different services across the many fine hospitals of
Philadelphia. And so there's those spaces, right.
Where people could be referred to our 3.1 facility.
Obviously if they're deemed medically well, another process is that they're.
Wait, let's just stop.
So you're saying that some hospitals where people are being detoxed are
So you're saying that some hospitals where people are being detoxed are going to refer people to your facility?
going to refer.
That's what you're saying?
Yeah, if they are medically cleared to do so.
Okay, and who is going to provide the funding for those people?
The hospitals don't provide the funding.
Again, objection.
Objection, objection, objection.
So, Steve, where the money comes from and how much money is there, that's not the issue.
I think it's legitimate to say where are you going to get patients from, but I think the money issue is not.
Well, Mr. Chair, the viability of this operation basically comes down to several things.
Do they have an ability to bring people into this facility to get services?
and also do they have an ability to be paid for those for each of those people and what
all around right let's let let's take notice of this mayor parker just announced a hundred
million dollars towards this effort right there is not a health commissioner
i'm objecting right now you know wait wait wait excuse me can i interject please
can i interject please okay let me interject please thank you so i think the the economic
viability of the project is not a voting issue however i understand that how the project is
funded has to do with how it's regulated and that is a concern for the protestants so any
conversations having to do with funding need to be focused on on the source of funding not as terms
of how much but if there is it if if the fund if the funding is the funding that would set it up
for what type of regulation because it's the it's the conduct which is of concern and this is a
special exception case so let's stay away from the economic viability of the project because that is
not a zoning issue. Okay, fair enough. Let me switch to criminal justice issues. So Ms. Daly,
you testified that you were going to screen for certain people with past offenses for
sex offenses and for violence. Is that correct? For violent crimes and sex offenders as outlined
in the CBA. Okay. So, but you would concede, wouldn't you, that other residents of this
program will probably have been interacting with the criminal justice system and have records of
arrests and confinement? Yes, sir. Okay. So you have one security guard. Is that person 24 hours
a day, or are they only there for certain hours a day? So as I outlined before, I think the security
guard would really be stationed more overnight because during the day, there'll be much more
staff that'll also be trained on security. When you say trained on security, are you
stating to us that they're going to be trained on how to deal with people who have deep interactions
with the criminal justice system and that they've worked in in the past or been trained in some
specific way to handle people who have criminal backgrounds wait because i didn't understand
your question did you did you say that the residents will be uh their criminal background
um let me let me restate it so you're saying that that the other staff this like six or
seven people, including, I suppose, some of the people who are preparing your food,
are going to be trained in some ways to handle people who have long and involved histories in
the criminal justice system? Well, I think in one way you are making an assumption about
folks that they are involved in the criminal justice system. Again, I showed that I'm in
recovery and I've never even been arrested. I have some parking tickets, though. But I will say that
like you know they will be trained on how to de-escalate and that's an important aspect right
um i'm just not sure if you could maybe clarify what your your
like what the question really had to do with you know she stated we'll have security night
and in the daytime we can have staff who will be trained in different things and that's where we
right okay so let's try to concentrate on that all right so um what's the average stay that
you're estimating in your facility for each of these residents is it one week two weeks three
weeks and how do you and and how are you calculating um you know the turnover um for
for each of the residents so again i can speak to like what you know long-term care is long
So, again, I can speak to, like, what, you know, long-term care is long-term care. The definition of long-term care is not actually defined in one way or another. There is spaces where Medicaid will cover up to a certain time period, and that period is up to six months.
And so, you know, but that doesn't necessarily mean that like some residents may not end up staying longer or things like that.
It's all kind of individualized care. Again, addiction can be an individualized disease.
OK, are you aware of all the other three point one facilities in Philadelphia and how long those the residents stay in those facilities based on their contracts with CBH?
No, I'm not, sir.
Okay. So when you're saying that it could be up to six months, is it based on anything in reality
from the state of Pennsylvania? No, but from other facilities I'm aware of.
In other states? Yes, sir. Okay. Because you don't really have any experience in Pennsylvania,
is that correct? Define experience? Working, operating, or consulting with substance use
disorder treatment centers in the state of pennsylvania i don't have that in any state
as i mentioned to you before okay um i don't have any more questions for this time
darwin what's who's your next person i just want a little redirect um so so so darwin if you take
redirect we're gonna break we're gonna break soon i mean we're getting on 6 30 um and we'll just
have to do this another time. I mean, it's just, you know, what started out, you thought you could
have everything done in 20 minutes and then, you know, it just didn't go that way. So why don't
we redirect and see where we stand with this? All right. So Bridget, a couple of quick questions.
When it comes to security, you've hired a security firm or you have proposals from
security firms correct yes sir okay and you're you're there and the type of firm
they're they're reputable yes sir they would be trained yes sir i'm objecting to that foundation
how can you say they're reputable all right but they it's her opinion and also she's not able to
it's her opinion because she contracted with them you're asking for fact we're not asking for
i asked so so so let her answer the question if she thinks they're
reliable and and my to further the last part of my security question was if need be would they
be in a position to train your staff. Yeah, I think that's the goal, right? Because I remember
here, we're also trying to keep our clients and our residents safe. You know, it's a two-way
street here. Okay. All right. No other questions. Steve, you have anything more?
Mr. Masters, are you? Oh, sorry. I didn't know I was muted. Yes, I do not. Okay. We're going to
break at 6 30 um we'll come back and we'll figure where we stand and just just try to figure some
things out how many more witnesses do you have darwin two now at best it will be two it will be
john disley and then michael uh daly um michael daly's from the rco no john diesley is from the
rco so you'll have an rco and you'll have the other person is michael daly he's he's the
For the company, right?
And then one more time.
How long would you think that takes, Darwin?
Given the nature of how Steve and I have been interacting, that will probably, with both of them, it will probably take 40 minutes.
All right.
And then, Steve, you think you have another hour and 40 minutes?
But, yeah, I think that's that's a that's a I can never guess for sure.
But I think it's about that. So we're we're going to break.
We'll get back to you about when we can do this. And I'm going to meet with Tanya and Hillary and figure out how we want to handle this.
OK. All right. We do appreciate trying to work together a little bit there.
A little bit. And is there anyone in the virtual audience whose case has not been heard today?
i see no hands okay thanks everyone we i appreciate you staying a little bit later and
uh we'll see where we stand with this thank you all thanks chair
So we'll see where we stand with this.
Thank you all.
Thanks, Chair.
Thanks, Chair.
Thanks, Chair.
Have a good evening.
All right.
See you, everybody.
Good night, everyone.
Good night, team.
Good night, everyone.
Have a good evening.