and we'll give tanya a few minutes if she needs it yes they're coming in slowly
Thank you.
okay chair I'm ready when you are
thank you good morning everyone my name is Frank DiCicco I'm the chair of the zoning board of
adjustment I'll be participating in today's hearings along with our board secretary confessor
plaza and board members Mr. Thomas Holloman and Mr. James Snell board administrator Tanya
Sunkit and Board Attorney Sharon Saleta are also in attendance. For those of you who haven't yet
participated in one of our virtual hearings, I'll go through some of the basics of what you can
expect. First, we will be administering oaths to individual participants prior to their testimony.
Second, for the benefit of anyone participating by phone, we ask that attorneys and witnesses
identify themselves prior to speaking or testifying. Third, we'd like to advise everyone
that this proceeding is being recorded and that by participating, you acknowledge your agreement
to be recorded. Fourth, for anyone participating by phone, if you wish to testify, you must raise
your hand by hitting star nine and then star six to unmute yourself. I'll repeat. For anyone
participating by phone. If you wish to testify, you must raise your hand by hitting star nine
and then star six to unmute yourself. Finally, to enter an appearance statement, call Google
267-270-5548 and leave your email address and the address of the property at issue.
I'll repeat that also. To enter an appearance statement, call Google 267-270-5548 and leave
your email address and the address of the property at issue. With that said, we can begin,
but before Mr. Plaza calls our first case, we'd like to ask if anyone is requesting a continuance
or withdrawal of an appeal that to be heard this morning if so please raise your hand
and i'll have a further announcement about continuance once we get past this
i have no hands up chair okay this also was brought to my attention this morning
by Ms. Saleta that a number of city council members
may be requesting continuances.
So if there are any members of city council,
representing any members of city council,
would you please raise your hand at this time?
Chair, I do have a request from the RCO
for number two, 1407 West Grange Street
and um a letter from councilwoman best saying that she supports the request
rachel pritzker is the attorney for the applicant is rachel long
good morning good morning rachel uh you swear for him to tell the truth
the whole truth and nothing but the truth yes please state your full name rachel r-a-c-h-a-e-l
p-r-i-t-z-k-e-r 1635 market street suite 1600 philadelphia pa 19103 you uh have you heard did
you hear sharon uh i did so we'd like to at least put our case on we have reached out to the rco and
the council office a number of times over the past couple months and not gotten anything in
return we then finally got an answer from the RCO I think was last week and
then yesterday about the continuance we've met all the posting requirements
about the continuance um we've met all the posting requirements and everything so we would
like to see if we could put the case on and then um i believe we have worked out with them a date
for an rco meeting but we've we reached out to them an incredible amount of times and don't want
to have to push this you know forward more than we have to if possible so are you suggesting that
they are aware that the continuance was going to be requested and that you were going to ask us to
go and hold here and hold we I just heard from them yesterday so we had been we had been asked
to send them documents we did we didn't get a hold of them until last week so I wasn't able to even
speak with them about any of this because they didn't respond to any of our emails and quite
frankly neither did the council office so I'm happy to have the RCO meeting but we don't want
to continue this for a couple more months given that we did everything on our end and would like
put the case on and then can happily have the community meeting you know and and within a
reasonable time period hopefully anyone from the councilwoman's office no hands okay we'll hear
the case and that will hold all right thank you mr chair any other requests for continuances or
withdrawals no hands chair thank you um let's see let me get my notes here uh all right uh
Okay, Mr. Plaza, please call the first case.
Sure. Meeting item MI 2020-000318. Address is 108 North 57th Street.
This is Sharon. Also, the attorney for this case, Joe Consol, is also the attorney on the first add-on on the list.
so I got that I'll call that next thank you thank you yeah we'll hear 57th street
north 57th street first and then we'll do the uh Sprague street after that okay
Mr. Counsel good morning good morning Mr. Counsel do you agree and wait uh do you agree
to waive the reading of its refusal and stipulate to its accuracy i do and do you affirm a swear to
tell the truth the whole truth for nothing but the truth i do and have you submitted an email
the package with the required documents including proof of ownership proof of tax compliance
a copy of the refusal or referral photos of the property in advance five days in advance of this
hearing i have thank you have you met with the rco we did meet with the rco thank you you may
put your name and address for the record please uh first of all am i sharing my my uh my zoning
packet or did i did i do that correctly yes yes great uh for the record my name is joseph
console. My address is 1 West 3rd Street, Suite 204, Media, Pennsylvania, 19063.
I'm here on meeting ID MI 2020, 000318. Property is 108 North 57th Street. That's 57th between
Arch and Sherry. The property goes straight through from 57th Street to Alden Street.
The owner is Invest Realty 2, and Representative Sidney Shaw is on this call.
It's a 1,245-square-foot property.
There is an application and a refusal for a two-family dwelling on an RSA 5-zoned property.
The zoning archive contains an application for a two-family dwelling from 2006.
There's no permit or refusal that I could find in the archive.
However, the property was turned into a two-family dwelling at that time
and occupied by two families until recently.
At some point, the property fell into disrepair.
However, my clients bought the property four years ago
and have since, let me pull it up,
been able to pull two-family rental licenses
and uh fixed the property up and had two families in the property um so we've they where is it
so there was a vacant license issued in 2015 the year they bought it they
So there was a vacant license issued in 2015, the year they bought it.
They were able to get two-unit rental licenses after they fixed it up and had rented it out.
They got those for 2017, 2018, and 2019.
In 2020, they were packaging the property for resale and figured out there was no use permit on file.
So these are all two-unit rental licenses.
uh so they uh contacted me in february we applied and um we now here here we are obviously because
of the delays that that we had um the property i've got a little bit of a floor plan and some
pictures property looks like this according to the neighbors that came to the rco meeting
The property has been a two-unit since 2006.
Some internal photos from when they were trying to package it.
And a floor plan exists up here.
We met with the RCO on July 29th.
We got unanimous support.
That letter came in this morning.
uh we sent it actually i believe the rco sent it over to you guys directly i also put a copy
into my packet which is page 36 i'm sorry
which is achievability and miss tempest carter
uh that that's really the the whole project i don't believe uh i have anything else to say
on that if there's any questions let me know witness you want to put on uh is mr sydney shaw
available putting his hand up
hello good morning sir please uh identify yourself for the record spell
your first and last name hello oh hi yes uh my name is sydney
shall we and uh i represent the uh yes it's sydney is s-i-d-n-u-y s as in sam s-i-d-n-u-y
and my last name is s as in sam h-a-u-y we're in front of tell the truth the whole truth and
nothing but the truth yes i do good morning sydney good morning
good morning joe good morning have you heard uh my testimony this morning
uh yes i just i just heard now right yes yes correct do you do you adopt that uh as your own
as representative of invest realty llc exactly on behalf of of some of my partners correct
okay great uh do you have anything you'd like to add to to this discussion regarding anything that
i said yes i just wanted to um to to to just summarize real quick um uh you know it's when
we bought the property we bought it as a two unit as when we um you know we applied for uh for rental
licenses as just joe showed you know for all the years that we owned the property always as a two
unit so uh you know we legally uh rented that as two units you know as two families you see number
number of units two right that's right there and and you if you look at the
dates that's 2017 to 2018 right so we we had this all the time so for us we
never we never thought this this could have a problem with with renting as a
two-unit and then into 2020 I don't mean to interrupt but your
your counsel has already explained that okay all right yes yes to have something new and different
fine if not we will accept his testimony thank you no that's good that's good i just wanted to
stress this point out all right thank you sir thank you thank you questions from the board no
no no anyone else wish to testify in this case if so please raise your hand
answer this time thank you planning commission good morning mr chairman and members of the board
david effecto f e c t e a u with the planning commission
you swear and affirm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth
yes sir i do thank you david please proceed thank you sir mr chairman
yes sir i do thank you david please proceed thank you sir mr chairman and members of the board
this property is indicated for residential single-family use on the city's comprehensive
plan this appears to be a pre-existing duplex we do not believe that continuing this use
will have an adverse impact on the block accordingly we recommend the variants be granted
thank you mi-2020-000318 108 north 57th street my vote is yes my vote is yes my vote is yes
my vote is yes thank you board and i'll stay on for sprake street yeah confessor we're going to
do the ad on Sprague Street next. You have that one? Yes. Okay. MI 2020 00067, I'm sorry, 0767 5625
Sprague Street. Mr. Counsel, you agree to waive the region of its refusal and stipulate to its
accuracy i do yes okay and have you submitted uh the packet your exhibit package uh with the
required documents including proof of uh ownership uh tech compliance and a copy of your refusal or
referral yes sir prior to this hearing yes sir this is a follow-up to a presentation that we put
on on september 16th gotcha okay great uh we put on the uh the presentation on september 16th uh
without having had an rco meeting uh this is uh the 12th board democratic
committee uh coordinating rco at the time told us
they could not host us um that that morning of the zba meeting
mr richardson from cindy bass's office appeared on here and stated that the
board um that that uh he would work say to the
board that he would organize an rco meeting for us
uh we heard the case um but it was to return today pending the rco meeting
Mr. Richardson and I spoke that day we emailed that day but since then I've
sent him I can't I can't tell you how many emails and calls and I haven't got
gotten any kind of response we don't believe this is a controversial
variance we're asking to I'll show you the picture to not include commercial
space on a CMX2 property in this row of properties that is all residential it's
near the intersection of East Shelton and Worcester in East Germantown.
So I have nothing to add except for my RCO information.
What was the position of the RCO?
The 12th Ward said they could not host us.
The Anthony Bass's office said that they would help, but they haven't called me or responded
to any of my calls since that day.
Thank you.
Here we have Charles Richardson.
The Richardson.
good morning good morning charles richardson councilwoman cindy bass's office
please excuse me you swear to firm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth
i do please proceed uh yeah you know i don't recall having heard from mr consul and you know
to be quite honest and we haven't received a whole lot of calls or anything along those lines
just to make sure that the record is clear. We have not received those calls or a lot of emails
other than possibly one. I cannot speak to the fact that this 12th Ward has not responded to
the request at this point in time. We will cede to the board to whatever you guys would like to do
with regard to this case but please be be clear we have not had a lot of communication back and
forth okay thank you thank you um questions from the board no no planning commission
good morning uh mr chairman david effecto with the city planning commission
this property is indicated for residential single family use on the city's comprehensive plan
We do not oppose the proposal for not including commercial space on the ground floor.
However, we would like to see a reduction in the proposed number of dwelling units.
Any recommendation on the number of units?
We would like to see it reduced to two units.
No number.
Excuse me, this is Sharon.
Do we know if there was a refusal for the number of units?
at that
mr council you're you're muted
the hi um this was not a refusal for units this is a cmx2 district
um i have the refusal refusal had to do with the commercial on the first floor
um i have the refusal refusal had to do with the commercial
yeah let me uh oh my sharing stopped let me get that back up
can you guys see that yes
okay all right um
um actually the refusal does reference the number of units um saying that three dwelling units
pardon me right yes all right i see it now okay all right we'll submit to the board's wisdom on
on on the number of units understood uh mi 2020 dash zero zero zero seven six seven
five six two five sprake street my vote is yes with proviso maximum three uh residential units
yes for proviso yes with proviso yes with proviso thank you board good luck okay
Calendar number MI2020-001230. Address is 1407R-09 West Grange Avenue.
Rachel, good morning. You agree to waive the reading of its refusal and stipulate to its
accuracy no so we i'm gonna have my colleague brandon saverin one moment uh do you uh submitted
the required documents uh proof of ownership tax compliance a copy of your refusal uh or referral
photos uh five days prior to this hearing yes thank you do you swear and affirm to tell the
truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth yes thank you um i'm gonna have my colleague so
i'm gonna share my screen but i'm gonna have my colleague brandon saverin um do the presentation
for this so tanya if you can do you see brandon saverin or brandon can you raise your hand so
that we can get you sworn in he's been promoted to panelists rachel thank you
uh good morning chair and members of the board can you hear me okay
yes fine
mr chair um confessor secretary confessor can you swear brandon in please sure brandon you
swear i found to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth yes i do thank you you
may proceed. So I'm sorry, but Brandon, if you could state your full name for the record and
spell it, please. So it's Brandon Saverin spelled B-R-A-N-D-O-N. Last name is S as in Sam, A,
V as in Victor, R-A-N. I'm also with Pritzker Law Group representing the applicant.
all right okay um so i'm gonna let yes um rachel is gonna uh control the screen here and i'm gonna
be the narrator um so we are here to discuss 1407 r-09 west grange avenue i hate the interrupt
up again I apologize but if you guys could maximize the screen for those who
are in the webinar to see clearly maximize the screen thank you get to
download it first yeah that'll work it's fine
is that better very well thank you okay so we're here to discuss 1407 r-09 west
grange avenue this is in north philadelphia about a block or two to the west of the only
transportation center to give you an idea of where we are and the proposal is
essentially to take this mid-block building which is a large
Uh, this mid block building, which is a large, um, abandoned automobile storage and repair garage that is currently two stories and add, uh, rehabilitate the existing two stories and add four stories on top of it.
The proposal would create 63 apartment units using the existing two stories as a parking garage deck.
A portion of the garage would also be dedicated to bicycle parking.
So we will end up with 77 car parking spaces, four of which would be handicap accessible, and 21 bicycle parking spaces.
so plenty of parking. There's also room to create a 2,000-square-foot commercial space
on the first floor of the garage. And as I mentioned, there will be 63 apartment units.
The vast majority of those would be two-bedroom units. Some will be one-bedroom and some will be
three-bedroom, but the vast majority are two. And the two-bedroom units would be about 800
to a thousand square feet in size depending on which layout they are. So the project generated
four refusals. The first one I'll address is the lack of a rear yard setback. If Rachel shows either
an aerial or just the location again. This is a strange property in the sense that it's very large
but it's mid block it has no direct frontage on any street thanks right yep perfect um so uh you
know essentially there is no way to create a setback on any side without demolishing a part
of the existing structure and this is sort of a you know hulking heavy thing um it's just not
practical um we wanted to put the dollars into rehabilitating this rather than um you know
modifying it in a way that we're not even sure would preserve its stability so we can't generate
a a rear yard without you know taking a chunk of the existing building away um before i speak to
all the other refusals um i'm gonna have rachel go to um uh that pdf packet i put together rachel
with the the four images yep that's it okay uh the next refusal is uh for the uh manner which
the parking garage on the bottom of the structure is accessed um there is a driveway to the south
of the building that leads from a corner of the garage to grange avenue and the examiner
gave us a refusal for accessing the garage using a unshared driveway that leads to the
front street. But we believe this was issued in error because the driveway is in fact shared with
the building's neighbor to the east. There is mention of a shared easement in our deed to this
property and I believe the deed of the property to the east as well. This was found by the
surveyor uh during his title examination and put on the plan as you can see highlighted there so
we believe that uh parking access related refusal was issued an error um that's the second refusal
um rachel you can go to the next page um so the the other two refusals have to do with essentially
the number of units in the building um one the unit count and two the height um so before i go
into that i just real quickly wanted to run through some pages in the upper north district plan
the housing recommendations that are contained within the district plan speak specifically to
dealing with this cluster of sort of large formerly warehousing and commercial lots
that are around broad street by the olney transportation center so you'll see here
housing recommendation seven says specifically that we need to allow redevelopment of these lots
and provide zoning relief where necessary rakes you can go to the next page
this is the introduction to the entire housing section and rachel yep perfect in that second
paragraph there it basically says that instead of knocking down existing single family homes or
consuming green space that development should be encouraged at major transit
nodes which we're right next to where density can be accommodated without
straining existing infrastructure in particular
the large lots on both sides of broad street
north of the OTC that's where we are could be redeveloped with housing
north of the OTC, that's where we are, could be redeveloped with housing atop a retail base,
which is exactly what we're proposing to do here. So redevelopment to create mixed use
without the consumption of any open space or single family homes. Rachel, you want to go
to the last slide there? Thanks. Okay. And to this point, the sort of recommended zoning map
at the end of the district plan specifically recommends the upzoning of our parcel we're one
of the red ones in zone k there to be either uh cmx uh it says 2.5 or 3. we're currently cmx 2.
so the reason that's relevant is because if we were under cmx 2.5 or 3 these two refusals for
height and unit count would be a non-issue even in cmx 2.5 given the area of the building there
would have been 78 permitted units we're well under that at 63 um we are over the limit which
i believe is 47 given the current designation of cmx2 that's all just to say the number of units
is is uh you know not abusive it doesn't intend to blow out the the existing regulation it's
actually an average of what the current zoning provides and what the up zoning to 2.5 would
provide. It's right in the middle. Height, I think, is the same sort of issue. I'm going to get some
numbers for you. We are creating six stories. If this was CMX 2.5, we would not have a height issue.
I believe that, let's see.
Thanks, Rachel.
Yeah, see if you can get the measurement there.
I thought I had written it down, but I think we're at 60 feet.
The maximum is 38 in CMX2.
If it was 2.5, I don't believe there would be a limit on this property.
For CMX2, it would be 55, so we're still 5 feet over.
but next three there would be we would be in the ballpark for hype okay thanks um so so that is
that is essentially the concept here um we think that we're really proposing something that the
upper north district plan um is intending to vote um and i think this would be a fabulous project
to deal with a really large vacant uh industrial parcel i'll also just add before we take any
questions from the board that the price point of these units is also within I believe the moderate
income price point so it does help support the need for more affordable housing as well so and
lastly just to address the community group we have the posters posted on the property I think part
of the letter that they sent said that we had posted the posters 40 feet from the front but I
I think that they didn't understand that this building is located in the center of the block.
So this vacant lot here is actually not our property.
So we couldn't post the zoning posters on this property,
but we did post them on all corners of the existing warehouse.
As you can see, again, it's in the middle of the block.
You know, I think they had thought that this was maybe the site,
but again, it's this middle site.
And obviously we can't post, this is sort of our best street frontage.
And it's, you know, I think also maybe they didn't understand that we no longer have to post those orange posters.
They're these now white ones.
So we'll be sure to clarify that when we get an opportunity.
But just wanted to make that clear.
And then I just wanted to, just for the record, provide all the outreach that we did starting August 19th to schedule a community meeting.
So I reached out to the RCO the 19th.
We also submitted the refusal and the plans on the 20th of August.
We also reached out again on September 14th, September 15th, September 29th.
Again, she asked us to forward the plans.
We did that again on the 29th.
As you can see, they're copied in this PDF.
again on the 30th and then we reached out to the ZBA to let them know that we were having trouble
getting a hold of the community group on the 15th of September after about like a month of efforts
and asked if what could be done they asked us to submit our inquiry here we did and then they kind
of let us know that this was the only rco in the area so if we could try
calling or leaving a message with charles or tyrone which we did to make
them aware these are the emails to tyrone and
charles that were sent on the 15th after receiving that information
Again, following up with them on the 29th of September, as we didn't hear from them.
again following up with them on the 29th of september
So we just wanted to show on record our outreach to both the RCO and the council office,
as we're always happy to do our best to make sure that these meetings are, you know, scheduled.
And again, happy to try and reach out.
I think Miad from my teams, as we speak, reaching out again to the RCO to see if we can get something scheduled.
but they do have all of our plans and just wanted to kind of provide the outreach so
happy to take any questions um from the board and and good job brandon on your first uh presentation
thank you
frank we can't hear you buddy oh i'm sorry i actually didn't have anything to add i think
oh he's saying he's saying to the chairman
no frank you're gonna have to go out and come back in again
We'll pause.
How about now?
You hear me?
Perfect.
I don't know why it does that constantly to me.
All right.
I asked if any questions from the board?
no is there anyone else who wishes to testify in this matter if so please raise your hand
no hands at this time chair thank you excuse me this is sharon i believe mr richardson was going
to sign on to testify is is he still here he's here his hand's not up
okay yeah I thought so too but I don't see his name but I don't see
well okay now he's here Mr. Richardson
good morning again good morning still under oath sir I don't know if you heard at the opening
statement we agreed to hear and and hold so if you have anything from your office you'd like to add
please do so. That would be fine. We had finally reached the RCO chair and found out that there
had been some health issues that had precluded them from being able to actually hear, do any
hearings at that point in time. And so we have worked with her and that's why she's been now
reaching out to all of the cases that might be a little bit backlogged as far as cases are
concern for them uh and we're going to be working with them to try to make sure that everything
moves moves forward including grain street uh as soon as possible thank you thank you um
so uh the hearing will be resumed we have a date uh tanya
i'm thinking
we can do two weeks august 20th at 9 30. over 20th i'm sorry october 20. it's okay
i wish summer was back i know me too okay uh at 9 30
yes chair thank you so this hearing will be resumed on october the 20th at 9 30 a.m
at which time we will consider any feedback related to the rco's position are we going to
hear from planning commission now or yeah i was going to do that next okay all right planning
commission good morning david fecto out of order i apologize yes okay good morning david fecto city
planning commission uh mr chairman and members of the board this property is indicated for commercial
and residential mixed use in the city's comprehensive plan this is a landlocked parcel
not located on a public street we believe the proposed use represents an overuse of the property
and is out of character with the surrounding area accordingly we recommend against granting these
variances the overuse has to do with the number of units yes sir any recommendation on that
uh we we do not all right thank you we'll take that up when we have the hearing on the 20th
all right thank you we'll take that up when we have the hearing on the 20th
okay all right thank you thank you
so i i let me go back on the record i don't know if i read that in properly so
So the hearing for MI-2020-001230-1407-09 West Grange Avenue is continued until October
the 20th at 9.30 a.m., at which time we will hear any comments, any feedback from the RCO.
okay next one is meeting item mi 2020-001270 address is 1800 master street and the attorney
he is Leo Moblehill. All right. Good morning, chairman. Are you going to tell the truth,
the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? I do. Do you agree to waive the reading of
its refusal and stipulate to its accuracy? I do. Also, have you emailed an exhibit packet
with the required documents, proof of ownership, proof of tax compliance, copy of the refusal
or referral photos and plans five days in advance of this hearing yes and have you met with the rco
and have a letter i have met with the rco we have not received a letter although i received a phone
call from ms louise bondy yesterday indicating that i would be receiving one but i never did
thank you can you please identify yourself for the record please certainly leo mulvihill that's m-u-l-v-i
H-I-L-L, 2424 East York Street, Suite 111, Philadelphia 19125. I'm here on behalf of the
applicant CRUD LLC for the property at 1800 Master Street. On the line with me this morning
should be one of the principals of that company, Kevin Matheson. So members of the board, what I'm
sharing right now on the screen is the exhibit packet that I emailed, including the refusal
appeal and project information form at page one understanding this is an application for five
residential units in an existing structure for some history to this property that i'll be going
over in a few minutes as well the area zoning maps at page seven this is now zoned rsa5 although
historically this has been a corner property that was previously a grocer with multiple apartment
units above, but has since been remapped from CMX to RSA 5. The deed for the property is at page
8. My client's commercial activity license is at page 16. Tax clearance is at 17. The zoning
notification is at 18. As stated, I do not have an RCO letter. I have photos of the property beginning
at page 21, and the plans for the property are at page 47. Members of the board, for purposes of
some history for this project, going through the zoning archives and just taking judicial
notice of these as public records. Back in 1959, there was a permit granted for commercial use on
the grounds floor of this building as a grocery store with four apartments above. When my client
obtained the property sometime around 2012, they filed an application for a four-story rear addition
with cellar and roof deck for four units and vacant commercial space on the ground floor.
um at some point some work was done for that property the addition had been constructed
um there were some holdups and then it was never completed so then again another permit was filed
and obtained back in 2016 this property was again zoned cmx2 that was a permit number 703589
and that was a permit permit for vacant commercial on the ground floor with residential units above
We're here today essentially seeking to not have any commercial space on this
property considering the character of this block as residential and instead
rather to have five dwelling units, each of which are relatively modest in size
ranging from about 500 square feet to just shy of 1,000 square feet.
Mr. Mohal, excuse me, we still have your first sheet. We don't have it. We're not
seeing any of the plans. Oh, I haven't switched over to those yet, but I will. Okay, thank you.
So that's what we're ultimately seeking today. With respect to the community meeting, I just
wanted to address that as well before we get to the plans. This was originally signed
to the RCO run by Ms. Louise Bundy. I understand she had been having some issues for some time
scheduling meetings. We reached out to the council person's office and spoke with Mary Jones.
We reached out to the council person's office and spoke with Mary Jones.
eventually we
Eventually, we were able to hold a community meeting, but due to the continuing coronavirus
pandemic, Ms. Louise Bundy and her associate Dorothy Kelly advised me that they would be
holding an outside meeting.
And what they would do is have members of the community assemble at this outside meeting
in front of the storefront on the 1600 block of Cecil B. Moore.
and they would be calling me then to review the plans and to discuss any issues with the project.
I personally hand-delivered about 25 or 30 copies of plans to Ms. Bundy about a week in advance of
that meeting, and then we held the meeting, after which I was asked why I wasn't there in person.
Clearly, I would have been there in person, but for the fact that I was advised not to appear in
person by the RCO and instead to be made available by phone, which I was there and I was happy to
answer everybody's questions. So that's basically where we stood with that RCO meeting. Why we don't
have a letter yet, I can't speak for certain. I'm not sure whether the board has received one,
but we did our best to comply with what the RCO requested of us, especially considering the
ongoing pandemic. What I'm going to do now, members of the board, is kind of fast forward
through to the photos. And Mr. Movahill and Chair, I just checked we don't have a letter either.
thank you so one moment please members of the board just going through my packet
there we go so just showing everybody that i do have my tax clearance the letter that i sent out
on september 9th which indicated we were having a meeting on september 22 1631 west east will be
it was an outdoor meeting. Refusal was attached to the back, and there's my certificate of mailing
at page 20. What I'm showing now are photographs of the zoning signs that were posted. I used
bright orange paper. Originally, this hearing had been scheduled for a previous date.
I guess I was forwarded at some point a new zoning sign for the new meeting.
That must have gone to my spam box, so I just used my old sign, and I wrote the correct zoning
hearing date and time on that to ensure that i'd be posting in a timely manner on the property
and that's looking at page 21. at page 22 to the right you can see this already existing
four-story addition that's there which was built permitted
at 23 you see that as well 24 that's a shot from across the street of 18th street
same thing with 25 and the 26 we're looking northbound on 18th street our property is off
to the left you can see the boarded up storefront the bay window etc and i've just had additional
photos as i paged through 27 and 28 showing the surrounding buildings this is directly across the
street looking at page 32 to the right you see a large rear yard area that will be used for trash
storage for the units at page 35 off to the left of your screen you'll see the frontage on master
street itself with the posted zoning sign and i took photographs of the properties on the corners
as well for more context this is looking down master street on pages 38 pardon me 39 and 40.
this is looking north down across the street from the property you see a vacant lot there on the
northeast corner and again this is a shot of the property taken from across the street
both a closer view and a more wide-angle view.
What I'm showing now on the screen is the site plan and elevation for the already existing
structure that we need to get essentially re-permitted because a previous permit expired.
The height itself of the existing structure to the front
is under the maximum in the zoning district.
Rear height is also compliant.
Photograph of the property.
And this is the note that was initially provided to the zoning board
showing that the rear addition had been built four years ago,
but per plans examiner,
H-A-O-Y-A-N-G-Y-E, for the record,
previously approved zoning at 430832 for the erection of a rear four-story addition and
previously approved birding permits had expired and needed to be reissued and that's essentially
why we're here today. What I'm showing now off to the right is the site plan with the existing
three-story brick structure to the front, the existing four-story structure to the rear,
and the relatively large rear yard.
the relatively large rear yard. Looking now on page 48 of my packet, I'm going to
go through the floor plans. So in the basement, we're just going to have
storage and mechanical. There are no dwelling units there. Looking at now on
the first floor, unit number one, two-bedroom, two-bath unit, about 896
square feet. There's going to be a ramp constructed at the front, this that I'm
indicating to, which is facing the corner of 18th and Master. This is the original storefront
entrance, which we're turning into an entrance with a bedroom, bath, living room towards the
middle, sort of a galley kitchen towards the center of the building, another bedroom to the
rear with an exit. Entering on Master Street, that's a common entrance you can use to go up
the stairs. So the next unit, that's unit two and units three, both on the second floor. Unit two is
one bed, one bath, 596 square feet. Unit three, one bed, one bath, about 500 square feet.
Looking on the third floor, to the front of the property, we have unit number four,
one bed, one bath, 563 square feet. Bedroom to the front, bathroom to the middle.
And unit five, which is to the rear of the property, is a bi-level unit. There's a living
room indicating here is more towards the center of the property. Bedroom to the rear, kitchen and
bounding on that fourth story addition and another bedroom or office to the rear of that property as
well. That's essentially all we're asking for, members of the board. While this property has
been rezoned as residential single family, it had been zoned previously C2 and CMX dating back to
the 50s, as far as I can tell, going through the city's zoning archives. It had traditionally been
a multifamily building, again, going at least back through the 50s per the city zoning archives.
that's all we're really asking for today is for the allowance to have these five units
rather than one relatively large single family home you know not including the basement members
of the board we're looking at at least 3 000 some square feet if this were to be a single family
home and the price point for that would be astronomical whereas where we have five units
there'd be more affordable for people who would like to live in the property and we're just
seeking for the legalization essentially of the building that already exists but the permits for
which had expired and to be allowed to have five dwelling units on this residential block on this
property that is zoned for residential use. Kevin, are you on the line? If you are, please raise your hand.
no hands are up Mr. Mulvihill all right well unfortunately I guess my client was unable to
make the meeting but he had indicated to me he would be on here there must have been something
that came up but I'm happy to answer any other questions at this time with respect to the
building itself its use or any other concerns the board has any questions from the board no
no anyone else wish to testify in this matter please raise your hand
here we have mary jones from the council office
ms jones you're going to meet yourself and wait to be sworn in
ms jones
yes good morning you're swearing for him to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth
i do please identify yourself for the record
my name is mary jones i represent uh council person council president daryl clark uh city
496 um yes um so i have um i did uh speak with um miss bundy and miss kelly who's been helping her
yesterday, and they were unable to put a letter together for today, but they did
communicate to me their position, and our office supports them.
At the meeting, I believe there was unanimous opposition to this type of project.
They would prefer single-family homes in the area and are against a multi-family use
and add density to the neighborhood.
Thank you.
Thank you.
No other hands, Chair.
Chairman, if you're very faintly,
but I'm not sure if you're talking to me.
I mean, the project's already been built out, right?
It's just a matter of the permit.
Yes, the project was built, permitted,
permitted. And now it just, because those permits expired and the work hadn't been completed and
and now
because those permits expired and the work
hadn't been
they hadn't closed everything out, essentially this is a new application to ensure that everything
is legalized because those permits previously expired. The only difference between the prior
request and this request is that initially there was a request of a vacant commercial space on the
ground floor. And since we no longer wish to pursue that, we're seeking to make that a residential
unit as well which i believe continues the character and the neighborhood concerns with
with respect to keeping this a residential area rather than a vacant storefront thank you the
planning commission good morning david vecto city planning commission mr chairman and members of
the board this property is indicated for single family residential use in the city's comprehensive
plan the character of this block is a mix of multi-family and single-family homes the average
multi-family home on this block has two to three residential units however since this building
already exists we do not object to granting this variance um i think let's do this the record will
be closed the board will render the decision at the next wednesday executive session the meeting
next week that'll be the 14th at 9 30 a.m pending a letter from the rco and okay thank you frank
excuse me this is sharon we can't both close the record and accept a letter from the rco
so if you want to resume it for next week for mr mulvahill to report on the letter from the rco
and chairman if i don't receive a letter between now and then i'll just advise the
word of that as well. Okay. Thank you very much. Thank you, Ms. Jones. All right. Thank you. Take
care. Okay. Meeting item MI 2020-000695. Address is 2000 Spring Garden Street, apartment 2 floor.
Confessor, excuse me. My mistake. I'm going to hold this to the end. They understand there,
might or maybe not I don't know I understand it might be a significant number of witnesses
okay I've got you so let's go to item number five and then we'll come back to spring garden
meet an item MI 2020-001-227-2739 North Fifth Street attorney is Jarrett Klein
Peter Coulson. Coulson down is the attorney. Is that a mistake?
Jared. Good morning, Mr. Chair, members of the board.
Jared, good morning. You swear a firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Do you agree to waive the reading of its refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
seen? Yes, I do. Also, have you emailed an exhibit packet with the required documents,
proof of ownership, proof of tax compliance, copy of the refusal or referral, photos and plans
five days in advance of this hearing? Yes, I have, sir. And have you met with the RCO and have a
letter? Yes, to both. Thank you. You may state your name and address for the record, please.
Thank you. Good morning, Mr. Chair. Members of the board, Jared Klein. It's K-L-E-I-N
from Blank Rome, 130 North 18th Street, Philadelphia, 19103.
Good morning again, everybody. We're here for 2739 North 5th Street,
and I'm joined today by Maria Gonzalez, who is part of the development team,
and we will hear from her in just a moment. This is actually, before the board again,
as a minor modification to an already approved project and I'm going to scroll
down to show the board that is the site that we're speaking about behind this
beige fence and these are the street views looking both directions from the
subject property and as the board can see these were the plans that were
previously approved by the board in May of 2019. At that time, this project came before the board
and there was a permit that was issued for vacant commercial space on the ground floor
with 30 dwelling units above. This particular project is designed to serve the needs
of seniors in the area, so the residential dwelling units are affordable efficiency units
So the residential dwelling units are affordable efficiency units for those who are over the age of 55.
for those who are
The approved structure itself is 48 feet, six inches tall.
And part of the project included a lot consolidation.
And that's why we're back before the board today.
One of the parcels to the rear of our project that was initially going to be included in the project
for some open courtyard space was sold via a sheriff sale to a third party and so we had to
redo the proposed lot consolidation in order to account for the loss of that parcel so we're back
before the board with the same project same uses very similar configuration the only difference
is again that loss of the rear parcel which changes the configuration of the courtyard
I am joined on the call today by Mike Donovan from the architecture team who
can go into detail on the plans if the board desires it although because this
was a project that was reviewed recently I don't believe the board needs to see
that in any great depth I we did meet with the RCO and I'm bringing their
letter up on the screen now as you can see the RCO is in non-opposition they
noted in their letter um again what i just articulated that it was due to a change in lot
line consolidation um we needed to have the project re-reviewed uh and the rco offered their
non-opposition to the project um again as i said we do have the architects here to answer any
questions the board may have uh and i would ask that miss sunkett uh unmute maria gonzalez uh so
I can briefly have her adopt my testimony. Maria, if you can virtually raise your hand,
that would be appreciated. Maria, you can unmute yourself and wait to be sworn in.
Mr. Chair, Maria Gonzalez is available for you to swear her in.
Thank you. Ms. Gonzalez, would you please spell your full name?
Maria can you hear us she may be having audio issues Jarrett okay if she's not
able to unmute can we try Mike Donovan
Mr. Donovan, you can unmute and wait to be sworn in.
Donovan?
Can you hear us?
Yes, you can.
Please identify yourself, spell your name for the record.
Michael Donovan.
It's D-O-N-O-V-A-N.
I'm the architect.
Where in front of you to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Please proceed.
Did you have an opportunity to hear my presentation?
Yes, I did.
And do you adopt my description as true, correct, in your own testimony?
Thank you very much.
Mr. Chair, I'll turn it back over to the board for any questions.
Thank you.
Any questions from the board?
Anyone else wish to testify in this case, please raise your hand.
chair we have sloan folks from the council person's office as long as you can meet yourself
morning chairman de chico zba board my name is fire officer director mr folks yes sir my name
I'm Sloan Fuchs, S-L-O-A-N-E Fuchs, F-S-A-F-I-R-O-L-K-S, Office of Councilwoman Maria Quinonez-Sanchez, Room 508 City Hall.
We're confirmed to tell the truth, all truth, and nothing but the truth?
I do, sir.
Please proceed.
The applicants having met with the coordinating RCO and receiving a letter of non-opposition,
the Councilwoman would also like to put on record that she has non-opposition for this variance request.
Thank you.
thank you planning commission
good morning david effecto city planning commission mr chairman and members of the board
this property is indicated for commercial and residential mixed use in the city's comprehensive
plan this is a mixed use affordable housing development that will add density to the north
5th street commercial corridor accordingly we are not opposed to granting this variance
Thank you. MI-2020-001227, 2739 North 5th Street. My vote is yes.
fifth street my vote is yes my vote is yes my vote is yes thank you very much good luck thank you
My vote is yes.
My vote is yes.
okay medium item mi 2020-001-219-2811 south hutchinson street
attorney steve
Good morning, members of the board.
Good morning, Mr. Chairman.
Do you affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
And do you agree to waive the reading of his refusal and stipulate to attack her scene?
Also, have you emailed an exhibit packet with the required documents, proof of ownership, proof of tax compliance, copy of the refusal or referral, photos and plans five days in advance of this hearing?
Yes, to all of them.
Okay. Also, have you met with the RCO and have a letter?
Thank you. Can you please identify yourself for the record?
Steve Bertil, B-E-R-T-I-L, of Claire Harrison Harvey, Brandsburg, 1835 Market Street, 14th floor, Philadelphia PA 19103.
I'm going to share my screen here.
Okay, great. Good morning again, Mr. Chairman and members of the board. As I said, my name
is Steve Bertil. With me, I have Mr. Plato Marwanekos, our architect, and Mr. Michael
Petrogyanis of the ownership group. We're here today to present our application for 2811
South Hutchinson Street. We're requesting a variance on this property for requesting relief
to allow for the relocation of lot lines to create eight new lots from one existing lot
and the subsequent erection of eight attached buildings for use as single-family household
living. With each single-family household structure, we're proposing a roof deck above
the third story with a roof deck access structure and accessory interior private parking garage
for once car access from both Hutchinson Street and 9th Street. So just to give you a sense
of what we're talking about, here's my submitted exhibit package that includes all the prerequisites.
I'm going to jump ahead to just photographs or actually to the zoning area of the property.
the property is zoned as rsa 5 um it's this entire section here it's it's the main front
of zone property is on south hutchinson street although the entire parcel stretches from
hutchinson to south ninth street um it sits on between johnson to the north and bigler street
to the south mr bertill was this a former catering facility yes it was i was going to
It was a catering facility slash banquet hall, sort of all-encompassing for that sort of business.
The property itself has since been demolished under a previous zoning and building demolition permit.
This is the current status. It's currently used as a vacant lot.
As the chairman stated, it was previously utilized as a catering slash banquet hall until demolition last year.
I believe the permit is for December of last year.
So as I said, the property is currently vacant, and its lot size is currently about 8,568 square feet.
And as I said before, it stretches from Hutchinson, which is the front we're looking at now.
And the frontage on the other side of the lot is South 9th Street.
Now, so this is a photo of 9th Street here.
This is when the hall was existing.
This is just to give you a sense of what 9th Street looks like.
In terms of the proposed development,
Let me zoom out a little bit so you can see that.
As I stated, we're proposing a subdivision of the parcels into eight new lots ranging
ranging in size from about 1,075 square feet to about 12, a little over 1,200 square feet,
including rear yards and an ingress-egress alley for emergency egress purposes.
As you can see, we are proposing four of the single-family homes fronting on Hutchinson
Street and then the remainder of for fronting on South 9th Street we get a
sense of the floor plan we're talking about or actually let me go here first
in a sense of the rendering we're talking about a three-story buildings
with a roof deck and a pilot access here as I stated prior these all of these
of single-family homes will be three bedrooms two and a half baths here's a sense of the floor plan
as you can see two bedrooms on the third floor a bedroom on the first floor
a accessory garage here for one single car parking as you can see in the rendering we're proposing
a front-facing garage for the accessory parking, and we'll get into why we believe that is
necessary when we discuss the refusals that was provided by the examiner.
We did have a RCO meeting that took place on September 23rd.
In that meeting, we received, so in that meeting, we received no opposition to the project.
We met the notification requirements, I believe we sent notices to over 180 homes in the area.
In addition to that meeting with the RCO, for the official meeting, we've had a subsequent meeting with the near adjacent neighbors to ensure that there was clear lines of communication during the construction phase.
If the project is approved at this level, when we move forward with the building permit, we want to make sure that we're good neighbors.
So, as such, we received no opposition from the RCO, and here's their letter of support.
Or non-opposition, I should say.
Oh, I'm sorry, support, letter of support.
Now, in regards to the refusal, we received two main refusals.
um the first was for the minimum lot area required under a rsa 5 zoning district minimum lot area
under the code is 1440 square feet are the proposed ranges of the lots that we would create on this
um on this big large parcel range from 1075 square feet to a little over 1200 square feet
I believe it's 12099. The plan, as I showed before, includes a ingress-egress alley on a rear of the
lots. There isn't, you know, that alley itself takes away from the square footage. But more
importantly, with the exception of about two to four homes in the area, every residential home
this block and on the surrounding areas, surrounding blocks, and the cluster of
homes are all under a thousand square feet. As you can see from the zoning
area here, neighborhood contents of the residential single-family homes are all
fairly small. So having lots much larger than what we're proposing here is really
out of character for this neighborhood. As I said, most of the lots, with a few
exception, are under a thousand square feet. They range from 920 to about 999.
There's a few that's a little over until 1,005 square feet. So we do believe that
the proposed square footage of our lots fits within the character of the
of the neighborhood and it also is needed for what we're about to discuss in terms of the next
neighborhood and it also is needed for
refusal so in addition to the lot area the next refusal that we received was for the accessory
parking under the RSA 5 zoning designation accessory parking is prohibited unless it can
be accessed from a rear shared driveway or alley or some sort of rear access.
As I showed you earlier, there's no space really in this proposed project for a
drivable rear alley and would substantially reduce the lot sizes as
such as currently a walk accessible alley here that's not accessible via
vehicle and it's the same situation on the other side of the parcel as such
there's no way to ingress and egress via vehicle on this lot so even if we
were able to put an alley that's drivable between the homes, there would
be no way to access them through the street. More importantly though is the
context of both Hutchinson Street and Knife Street. Firstly, there's already a
large curb cut due to the prior use of a banquet hall that had sort of a
driveway a driveway access in addition to that as you can see from these
photographs there's currently the property sits across the street from
commercial garages where there's so there's curb cuts running all the way
down through down Hutchinson and therefore there's no parking here anyway
and therefore it doesn't having those additional curb cuts to have front
facing garages does not change or substantially alter the context and
character of the street this is Hutchison here if you look on 9th Street
that's one-sided parking which is here which means there is no parking on the
side of the street where the parcel is placed and therefore we would not be
removing or cutting into any existing parking on that side of the street
additionally in terms of the context when it comes to front-facing garages
this board has already deemed front-facing garages as appropriate on
the street in the past as you can see here there's front-facing garages
immediately adjacent to the parcel question on the on our side of the street
for for newly built residential homes and that is also the same case on 9th
Street this is on 9th Street or the two more recently built residential homes
immediately adjacent to our lot this is right here was the banquet hall when it
was before it was demolished in addition to this which is as important
if not more important this is what the neighbors have expressed to us that they
want and support. Neighbors have let us know that it's already extreme pressure
when parking in that area as it is, and therefore RCO leadership and the near
neighbors have told us that because parking is essentially a nightmare in
that area, that they're supporting this project in part because of the
inclusion of the front-facing garages. As such, because of the context of the
Street because of the existing curb cuts on Hutchinson and because there's
already front-facing garages in existence on both 9th and Hutchinson
Street we believe that this is a one of those rare occasions where it's
actually appropriate to have front-loading garages as part of the
single-family residential use as opposed to what's typically required in terms of
rare access. So because of those reasons, we believe that the request of variances
are de minimis in nature, not only appropriate to the neighborhood, but would
would actually enhance the current use as it's currently a vacant lot,
eyesore, as most vacant lots usually are. We don't believe it will create any
additional congestion of public streets due to our inclusion of the off-street
parking and we do not anticipate any uh any negative impact on the supply of lighter air
negative impact on the supply of lighter air on neighboring properties or the welfare of the neighborhood as a whole. And so for all these reasons, we're requesting variance approval when we believe it's appropriate.
on neighboring properties or the welfare of the neighborhood as
I have with me, as I said earlier, Mr. Michael Petrogiannis. Michael, if you could raise your hand so Ms. Sunkit could recognize you.
and who are you looking for mr bertell uh mr michael petrogiannis and if you can't find him
um he may be under the architect's login which is mr plato uh yes plato is um available to unmute
okay mr plato please identify yourself for the record spell your full name
i'm sorry i was trying to unmute i apologize i played a maranakis jr 107 south 2nd street
philadelphia pa 19106 your last name please m-a-r-i-n-a-k-o-s we're in a firm to tell
the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth yes thank you uh mr chairman uh plato have
you heard and have you heard my testimony this morning as in as in regards to the design of this
proposed application and project yes i have uh do you confirm the truth from my testimony and
adopted as your own? Yes, I do. And is Michael Oren logged in with you? He's not presently
physically with me, but I can't tell if he's logged in or not, so I don't know. I think we
can forego that, Mr. Bertil. Okay, thank you very much. And Plato, is there anything outside of my
testimony that you feel that needs to be added? The only thing I saw was on the site plan that
The alley, we might have to add another three-foot alley along 9th Street because there's – I don't know if you go back to the – I know you guys are busy.
I didn't want to take too much time, but –
I'm scrolling back now.
You see, there's an existing alley that's to the south of the properties that the existing houses have access to.
and according to rogerio and plant um i don't know if we have access to that alley that's along the
south end of the property there's an alley that goes to hutchinson and there's an alley that goes
to ninth street and then there's an alley that heads south because of fire egress and public
safety we have to have an egress through all these properties so so the only change might be
that we might have to add another alley that's going towards that's three feet in addition to
the three feet alley that exists making it six feet again i think that's the only thing that
i wanted to add but again it doesn't really change the the eight houses and the front loaded garages
or anything else but it's just for a public safety um just so that we are that cannot be changed
today if um if that change is going to be made maybe by administrative review are you submitting
revised plans today requesting that change uh no sorry no we're not submitting revised plans today
if we if we would make that change it would be in the administrative review okay thank you
thanks sure any questions from the board no no no anyone else wish to testify in
this matter no hands at this time thank you planning commission good morning
David Fecto City Planning Commission mr. chairman and members of the board this
property is indicated for residential single-family use and the city's
comprehensive plan. This property is on a block of mostly one-story and two-story single-family
homes. Accordingly, we have no objection to granting these variances. Thank you. MI-2020-001219
2811 South Hutchison Street. My vote is yes. My vote is yes. My vote is yes. My vote is yes.
Meeting item MI 2020-001-234. Address 4401 Magari Street, Apartment 1.
Meet an item MI-2020-00123.
Our attorney is Jared Klein.
jared good morning you agree to waive the reading of its refusal and stipulate to its accuracy
yes i do uh you still under oath from this uh from earlier have you emailed an exhibit packet
with the required documents proof of ownership proof of tax compliance copy of the refusal or
referral folders and plans five days in advance of this hearing yes i have and uh have you met
with the rco and have a letter yes thank you please identify yourself for the record thank
you uh good morning again mr chair members of the board jared klein it's k-l-e-i-n from black
rome 130 north 18th street philadelphia 19103 uh here for 4401 mcgargie street and i'll spell
that for the stenographer it's m-e-g-a-r-g-e-e as with my presentation earlier this morning
this is an addition to a project that previously went through the zoning process the site you can
see on your screen is still a vacant parcel that is under development back in 2018 the property
was zoned to be the the board approved the the life center at penny pack which is a medical office
and daycare center for seniors, and the project was to have 83 parking spaces and the construction
of two structures. This application is a follow-up to that in that we're now seeking approval for
signage to be installed at the property for the to-be-constructed life center. There's a collection
of signage that we're seeking approval for. As you can see on the refusal, there are several
monument signs that are being erected a canopy sign and several freestanding signs all of which
require some zoning relief both for the inclusion of a logo to identify the operator innovative
and because of the overall size of the signage itself i'm showing the board on my screen now
the prior zoning approval that was issued in august of 2018 and that project remains under
under development. Here you can see the site plans showing the location of the
signage. As the board will note only one sign is going to be directly street
fronting and that is that sign down here. The remainder of the signage is
signage that is interior on the property that's going to be used for
identification of entrances and exits, parking locations and things of that
nature uh interior to to the to the property um this is an example here uh rendering of what the
signage would look like um this is the canopy sign that will be uh constructed on the building
again not visible um or not adjacent to any street frontage this is on the interior of that of that
property uh again signs that are going to be used for directing traffic uh you know identifying
visitors parking employee entrances and things of that nature within within the site
um and that is the scope of uh the signed package that will be installed at the property
um we did meet with uh the rco uh and as you can see i'm scrolling through our mailing
uh and certificate of mailing uh as you can see uh the rco is in non-opposition
they actually met at the location um with uh representatives from the development team
walked through all the signings and then followed that up with a zoom meeting um and the result of
that uh was a vote of uh it was a unanimous vote not to object uh i'll also show the board a copy
of a letter uh that we received from uh councilman heenan uh can we uh unmute mr john unger please
John, if you can raise your hand.
Can you hear now?
Hello?
Hi, John.
Mr. Chair, could you swear Mr. Unger in?
Doug, spell your full name, please, for the record.
Sure. First name is John, J-O-H-N. Last name is Unger, U-N-G-A-R.
Sure. First name is John, J-O-H-N.
Last name is Unger, U-N-G-N.
Very firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
Yes, I do.
Thank you. John, did you have an opportunity to hear my brief presentation this morning?
Yes, I did.
Do you adopt my statements as true, correct, in your own testimony?
Yes, I do.
Thank you very much.
Mr. Chair, I can go into more detail on the signage if the board wishes, but at this point, I'll turn the floor back over to the board.
i'll ask the board if they have any questions no
anyone else wish to testify in this case please raise your hand
no hands chair thank you planning commission good morning david effectos city planning commission
Mr. Chairman and members of the board, this property is indicated for residential, single-family use in the city's comprehensive plan.
We do not believe the proposed signs will have an adverse impact on this area.
Accordingly, we have no objection to granting these variances.
Thank you.
MI-2020-001234, 4401 McGargy Street, my vote is yes.
My vote is yes.
my vote is yes my vote is yes thank you confessor before we call the next case
a sonographer do you need a break because this might be a little bit long
yes if i can have just two minutes pardon me if i can have just two minutes five minutes
five minutes okay we'll take a five minute recess thank you you got it thank you mr chair have a
good afternoon
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
we'll give it a couple more minutes uh we'll start at 11 10. it's now 11 0
almost 11 08 so 11 10.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
okay um we're back on is everyone ready
yes okay yes all right very good confessor please call the next case
Okay. Meeting item MI 2020-000695, 2000 Spring Garden Street. Appointment 2R.
Is this a case that we heard already? Yeah, this is a continuing case. We couldn't get all the
testimony in. Gotcha. So this will be... I'm sorry, I just need for my records. What happened to number
eight? We didn't have number eight. What was that number? What's the street number? Oh, I'm sorry.
go ahead you can continue okay all right all right anyone here on 2000
Spring Garden Street yes attorneys good morning this is Andrew Miller I
represent the appellant
hey mr. Miller
Okay, Mr. Miller, can I suggest Mr. DeMarco, I believe, is also here on this case?
yes um where how do we begin this uh i know we left off we needed a little bit more time i
believe or we didn't have enough time that day uh i don't remember the attorneys who was the last one
to uh to speak um if i'm not sure that i'm correct on this but i think the applicant had not
quite finished presenting their case and then the other side was going to present you're probably
correct because the other side had two attorneys right and mr bolan and mr demarco i believe
yes okay okay mr miller good morning may it please the board my name is andrew miller i
represent the appellant 2000 spring garden llc if i may and do you swear and affirm to tell the
truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth I do thank you and confessor we can forgo all the
other issues because the we this is a continued continued case okay thank you thank you Mr.
Chairman if I may share my screen just to refresh everyone's recollection of where we are
and then I'll launch into my into my case
Thank you.
Please recall that this is a historic photo of the corner of 20th and Spring
Garden Street. These are the plans that have been approved by the Historic Commission after
months of hearings, meetings with committees of the Historical Commission and community
involvement. This is the view from 20th Street. This is a historical map showing the original
arrangement of properties and on the right of your screen is the corner of 20th and Spring Garden
streets. You'll see that the property on the corner of 20th and Spring Garden streets
was slightly longer than the property next door.
This is the current photo from 20th Street. You'll see that the existing building is a two-story
building. It's nondescript. It's approximately 40 to 50 years old. It replaced the original
structure that was on site and parking for this property is loaded from the street and
there's quite a long curb cut along this along 20th street.
Miller, the historical presentation you just gave us was that for a three or four story building
originally? Let me take you back there.
Right, so it's three stories with a pilot house.
That's what's being proposed. I'm asking the slide before that where you have those purple
the slide before that where you have those purple uh footprint yes okay was that a three-story
building uh no it was a 50-foot building that matched the building next door okay 50 foot
three or four stories where it was 50 foot okay that's correct but currently that back end at
least is is a two-story building the current that's correct okay thank you that's correct
now these are the current conditions and you'll see
the rear of the property next door and the owner of the property next door is represented by Mr.
DeMarco and that's a property that's been enveloped in scaffolding for at least the last
three years. And you'll see the back of our property there.
Now this photograph shows the evolution of the project as it progressed. Let me see if I can
make it a little larger. As it progressed through the historical commission process
with involvement of the neighbors and the RCO. Originally, it was a building that was
rectangular. If you see the rear, there was no stepping of the rear. So the mass of the building
was much larger than the final approved plan. Through that process, the number of units were
reduced from seven to five. The height of the overall structure was reduced. The setbacks in
the rear and to the right is the final approved plan the plan before you today and so you'll see
the massing is substantially reduced to the right now we spent a good deal of time talking about
the bird's eye views from the various perspectives. And Valeska Stanky, our architect, one of our
architects, gave testimony. And you'll see that in this bird's eye view, the outline of the new
proposed structure is superimposed on the photo. And this is the view looking east.
And you'll see the parking garage of city view that runs behind all the houses on this block.
This is a view looking southeast, and you'll see there's been suggestion
by the opponents to this project that the light and air is reduced, and you'll see the
space between the building behind and the new proposed structure, and you'll hear further testimony from our architect today about the impact.
This is another view looking east, and what we showed here, and we spent a great deal
of time demonstrating at the last hearing, on the left is the presentation of the opponents,
where they exaggerated the impact and the board concluded that this was an exaggeration
where the length of the pilot house was exaggerated against the actual plans to the right
and the length of the building was also exaggerated
This is a bird's eye view looking west.
this is a photo of
This is a photo of the existing conditions.
We have a two-story building at 2000 Spring Garden Street.
We have a 50-foot apartment building owned by the primary opponent to this project.
And they're opposing the restoration of a building of equal height to theirs.
This is another front view of existing conditions.
This is a side view showing the parking area behind and the curb cut that runs
approximately 50 or 60 feet from the rear of the building.
this is the building directly opposite this building on 20th street this is an existing
structure that faces our building and as you'll see the entire lot is filled with structure
And it's quite a large massed structure.
This is a side view of the existing structure.
This is a view from across the street, looking across 20th Street, and the subject property
is here and finally this is a view looking at the subject property and viewing across
seeing the front of the building across 20th street
now a great deal of time was spent talking and hearing the objections
that were raised by the opponents to this project concerning light and air.
There was a suggestion that the grant of a variance in this case will create a shadow on the objector's property.
We've provided to opposing counsel and to the board light studies that demonstrate that that's not the case.
But I want to point out to the board that in the Liberty Lofts case versus this zoning board,
the Commonwealth Court said that shadow light impact is not relevant unless it's created by the grant of the variance.
And the testimony that you'll hear today demonstrates conclusively that the same shadow will be created by the erection of a 38-foot building as would be created by a 50-foot building as it impacts the next-door neighbor.
So, with that introduction, I'd like to ask Valeska Stanke to raise her hand, and she'll testify.
Good morning, Ms. Stanke. Would you please spell your first and last name for the record?
Yes, Valeska Stanke, W-A-L-E-S-K-A-S-T-A-N-D-K-E.
We're in the firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Thank you. Please proceed, Mr. Miller.
Thank you. Can Ms. Stanke please share her screen?
You are sharing yours.
I think the administrator
has to
has to enable you
okay great are you seeing my screen now yes yes okay now miss stankey
do you recall all your testimony at the last hearing i do
okay and do you recall the claims made by mr demarco concerning the shadows
And do you recall the claims made by Mr. DeMarco concerning the shadows cast upon 2002 Spring
Garden Street?
By the proposed structure?
Yes, I do.
Now, following that dialogue, did you do anything to study this issue?
yes i try to to watch and see what is the real impact on the the structure the neighbors
structure and how did you do that um i designed the the building on in a software that i use to
do my designs and this software allows me to include the geolocation so when i did that i
could create all the shadows that the building the proposal is doing over the the neighbor's
property. Okay and so just so that everybody's clear what you said was the geolocation is that
correct? Yes, yes. Okay so your software
understands the location of the property
and its position with regard to the rotation of the earth and the sun. Is that correct?
Yes, is that correct? I can include in this software the geolocation from the Google Earth.
Okay, and is that what you did?
Yes. Okay. Now, at my request, did you provide us with a comparison study to show the differences
between the shadows cast by a 38-foot-tall structure and a 50-foot-tall structure?
Yes. I use the same design on the right side, and our 38-feet-tall is on the third floor.
So, if I just remove the last floor, I can have the building with 38 feet tall.
Okay. Now, in fact, the house at 2002 Spring Garden Street is 50 feet tall. Is that correct?
Okay. Now, would you please explain the impact in the fall and explain the shadows
that that are created in the fall season at 8 a.m. Yes the the screen that I'm
sharing with you now it's showing on the right side the building with 38 feet
and on the left the building with our 50 feet almost 50 feet or the same size
of the the neighbor so I'm sorry we can see here that at 8 a.m. on the fall we
have the structure with most of shadow and the 38 feet we have part of the
last floor. And this changes by hour, of course, and at 10 a.m. we have at least the same.
Not exactly, of course, but we can see that only the last floor will be
covered by the sunlight. Okay, so are you saying that at 10 a.m.
there's almost the same shadow cast by a 38 foot building as a 50 foot building on the property next door.
Yeah, it's pretty similar. The changes are not significant.
Also, we can go further and then at noon, now here we have, sorry, it's PM here.
I can fix this later.
We have sun covering both buildings and at this time we start to see the shadow from
the garage, sorry, the garage building from Cityville.
Is it safe to say that as of 12 noon in the fall, there is no shadow from our property
to the property next door?
Now, do the impacts differ by season?
Mm-hmm.
I'm sorry, can you please go back to 8 a.m. in the fall?
Now, in your study, do you show the impact of shadows from across 20th Street?
from across 20th street yes i i did this because i i need to uh understand how everything works
Yes, I did this.
and the the buildings across the street are very important too at 8 a.m they are creating shadow on
the street and we can see that the 20th doesn't have sunlight and our proposal is being covered
part of that by the shadow from the buildings across the street.
So are you saying that we are in shadow, that our proposed structure is impacted by shadow
from across the street?
Yes, it is.
Does that shadow from across the street early in the morning extend beyond our property
to the property of 2002?
Okay, now can you show us the impact in the summertime? Sure, summer here, oops,
spring, summer. So here I create something a little bit different, I will
explain, and this is the shadow creates by our proposal over the neighbor's
And this yellow part, it's the shadow created by only the variance, the height.
So we are creating, like I'm trying to represent here, that most of the building will be covered
by the proposal with 38 feet. So this gray area is a 38 feet building.
and this yellow part is the height above that.
You jumped ahead of me, so I want to make sure that we understand what we're looking at.
You're in a new document now, is that correct?
No, no, no.
It's the same document, it's just a different slide.
Okay, but before we had the 38 foot to the right and we had the 50 foot to the left,
right?
Yes, before we had.
I did this comparison on fall only.
Right.
And so now what you did was you synthesized the information from both of those views and
you're now showing the area of difference with the, to me, it looks brown.
Is that brown?
study done by Mr. DeMarco's team?
Yes, I received that.
Okay. Would you show the panel that study?
Let me open here. We have this and this.
so their study is this on the left and I create something similar here on the right
okay so the study on the left is the one that was provided to us last week by Mr. DeMarco is that
right? Yes, that's right. Okay, now do you think that they have fairly and accurately shown the
conditions with their study? And somehow they they try to mislead this presentation. They use a 24
hours period. It's showing here on the graphic and more than 12 hours is night. So the building
it's covered by darkness most of the time of this GIF. So it's fair to say there are no shadows
cast at night, right? Of course not. Okay. And also the buildings across the street is not here.
okay so they don't show the impact of the shadows cast from the building across 20th street do they
no so they make it seem as if the only shadows that exist are those created by our building
is that right yes okay now at my request did you prepare a more fair analysis of
the impact of the light at this location. Yes, on the right side I created this
almost the same presentation, the GIF, divided by 30 and 30 minutes if I could
say that. We can see the hours under the presentation here and I use only the
times that we have Sun. So we are in the winter and it starts early morning, 7, 8
7 30 and we go through the day but it's fair to say that in every instance by 12 noon there is
no impact is that right yes okay and then the duration of the uh of the shadows cast changes
with the season right yes changes a lot in seasons right but but for sure we're only talking about
the longest period of time is from approximately 7 30 a.m to 11 30 a.m is that correct yes we can
use their graphic and it's showing here that around 7 15 i can say that is the time that
that our proposal is casting shadows onto the neighbor's property, 2002, until 1130.
And the rest of the day, it's from other structures.
Now here they are saying that it's Cityville Towers.
So we have this four hours, four hours something, and a day, and a winter day.
This changes a lot on summer.
Right.
And everyone on that block is impacted by shadow created by the existing parking garage.
Is that correct?
Not only the parking garage, but the towers also.
Now, finally, do your exhibits that we just discussed fairly and accurately depict the
conditions at this location?
yes okay thank you very much you're welcome i would like to say one more thing if i can
uh mrs miller mr miller please um i did some uh calculations uh just to to have some percentages
We have on the third floor 38 feet like we are saying until now and on this floor we have 45 feet set back on the rear.
setback on the rear. On the fourth floor, we have 53 feet setback on the rear. This means that we are
On the fourth floor we have
5% more or bigger than the neighbors. Per zoning, we can use 5% more than the neighbor because it's
an intermediate lot. We are in the corner, we can use 80%. So if I did a simple math, I can take
that we have 57 feet in the backyard, they have 64, and this means that we are 5% longer than
from the neighbors. I don't know if I was clear on this, but we are using only our 5%
that we can by zoning. It's fair to say that the only variance
sought here is for height. Yes, and this height, we consider that
that we are using only this 5% that we can use on the last floor.
Thank you very much.
If we build a building with 38 feet and use our 80% by right with no variances,
just project and build, approve and build, this building will cover more than we are proposing now.
Thank you.
Okay, thank you.
I think Mr. DeMarco is trying to be heard.
Unmute yourself, Mr. DeMarco.
Okay, someone muted me. That's, sorry. Thank you. Let me say this, Mr. Chairman, I wanted Mr. Miller to get...
Let's get you on the record, please.
Good morning, everyone.
Richard DeMarco here on behalf of Mooring Properties, the property owner at 2002 Spring Garden.
You want to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Mr. Boland, are you going to be jumping in during this conversation?
I will try not to, but if you'd like to swear me in, Mr. Chairman.
Let's swear you in just in case, all right?
Full name?
Ryan Boland, 1801 Market Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, represent Spring Garden Civic Association.
We're ready for him to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
Thank you.
Okay, Mr. DeMarco.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Good morning, everyone.
So, Mr. Chairman, what I'm going to do is I'm just going to – I wanted Mr. Miller to get through the testimony from Ms. Stanky.
I do have an objection to the fact that that one comparison, those comparison drawings that showed the difference between the two, I did receive the shadow study prepared by Ms. Stanky, but not the comparison drawing.
So I would say this, I'm going to do my cross-examination, you know, as best I can.
I'd like to preserve the right to review those drawings, and I'd ask Mr. Miller to provide the comparison study to me.
I don't think I'll have to recall anybody, but I do want to preserve that right, place it on the record, and I'll try to do my cross, and hopefully I can get through it and it'll be fair and whatnot.
but i do want to mention on the record that i saw the the comparison drawings with the yellow
portion for the first time during miss stankey's testimony okay so i'm also going to ask that miss
stankey continue to share her screen because i don't have those um yellow uh comparison drawings
so i can refer to them during my cross that's all right thank you so let me ask this as a general
matter of miss stanky um i'm so i'm sure can you hear me okay miss stank yes yes i'm great i'm sure
you're not going to present testimony here and i don't i don't know that you did but i heard
something that confused me you're not going to testify to this board that a taller building
casts the same shadow as a smaller building right no that's not your testimony right
I didn't understand your question.
It's a very simple question, Ms. Stanky.
Does a taller building cast a greater shadow than a smaller building?
The difference is not relevant.
So you're refusing to answer the very simple question that a taller building,
or you're trying to argue to this board,
that a taller building does not cast a greater shadow than a smaller building?
It is casting shadow, but this difference between 38 feet
It is casting shadow, but this difference between 38 feet tall and the building that is being proposed is not relevant.
Ma'am, I'm going to ask the board to instruct the witness to answer my question, who's not answering it.
Does a taller building cast a greater shadow than a smaller building?
Which smaller building you are being referred?
A 38-foot building that we are proposing, this difference is not relevant.
Okay, you've again refused to answer my question.
I don't know if she's refusing.
I mean, I'm not an architect by no means, but if someone were to build a 30-story building on that site,
but the footprint was only say from the front of the building back 30 feet it certainly would have
a a greater shadow but not as wide all right i mean so i right i think i know where you're going
but it doesn't i don't think you're asking it the right way that's just my opinion well well look i
i certainly i don't feel i got an answer to the question so note my objection that the witness
refuses to answer a very simple and obvious question and i think that's how you have to
viewer testimony she can't answer the simple question of does a taller building cast a greater
shadow than a smaller building where it exists if that's are you saying that it's a buy a buy right
that miss stanky spoke to are you using that as the example that that buy right building
i heard her i heard her offer the testimony that the 50-foot building is is not casting uh as great
a shadow as a 38-foot building now what what you're saying mr chairman is that if the
area is is smaller than the greater area might be equal but that's not the question i asked the
question is does the taller building cast a greater shadow than a smaller building that's
the question she hasn't answered it and i object mr chairman she has answered it three times
i'm gonna ask that we all be civil today thank you
don't speak unless the other one has stopped speaking we have to get everything on a record
thank you kindly mr chairman i object the witness has answered three times she said it does but the
difference in this instance she used the word not relevant i would prefer to use the word not
material but the exhibit speaks for itself she shows the difference between the 38 foot and it's
on our screen now and the 50 foot and that difference is only uh on the roof of the building
next door at greatest impact so mr mr mr demarco is going to have to live with the testimony that
he has and he can spin it however he likes in closing argument but in the midst of the
examination it's inappropriate uh mr chairman may i continue uh yeah please leave up miss stankey
um so this yellow area is what you say is the difference between
an as of right project versus and please go to the 8 a.m uh portion okay thank you so so that's uh
The yellow is the difference between an as-of-write project and the current project, right?
All right.
So the yellow represents the additional shadow cast by the current proposal, correct?
Yes, correct.
And this time, the sun is not casting or, can I say, shining on the rear.
any you can see that any one of these buildings has sunlight on the rear facade at this time
so i'm not sure what you're what you're talking about but so the yellow is the we admit that the
yellow is the additional shadows cast by the current proposal right yes and that's due to
the additional here the sunlight can i finish my question mr chairman if the witness can answer
please i think she was trying to finish yeah miss thank you please please go ahead i just want to
say again at 8 a.m on the summer the sunlight doesn't shine on the rear facades
for any building in this block and this block are you talking about current conditions or
because of the proposal that's you're showing on the screen the current and the current if we didn't
build anything on that corner. At this time, any building will have sunlight in the rear.
If we go further and we go to 10 a.m., we can see that the sun starts to shine on the rear.
At 10 a.m., we can see that the sun starts to shine on the rear.
And at this time, 10 a.m., and sometime before, we have almost nothing in this difference
between 38 feet tall building by right or the proposal.
Ma'am, go back to your 8 a.m. proposal, please.
Thank you very much.
You said that the current conditions are there is no shadow cast.
That's because the current structure is two stories.
Do you agree with that?
yes okay so the shadow that you show cast upon not only 2002 and 2004 spring garden but also
2006 spring garden is a new shadow cast by the current proposal right yes so the current proposal
uh removes sunlight at this time frame at 8 a.m in the summer from not just my client's property
2002 but the 2004 and the 2006 spring garden property correct correct and the additional height
proposed by the applicant not only impacts my client's roof but also the 2004 and the 2006
property right the roof no the roof only for 2002 yes but the the shadow that you show in yellow
is impacting the 2004 and the 2006 property. Agreed? Just the backyard. Okay. So now you said
that I believe you testified that only the roof is being impacted on my client's property and
that that's negligible. Did I understand that correctly? Yes. Okay. Did you consider the fact
that my client may want to have put a deck on her roof you did consider that yes if she wants
so you're showing a pilot house and the fifth story or fourth story excuse me of the proposal
is casting a shadow on on the roof of my client's property and don't you agree that if my client
planned a roof deck on her property that would impact her roof deck agreed yes for all right
or 30 minutes in the morning okay but there's an impact agreed yes all right fair enough
and so you certainly i think you already said it but i just want to make clear you certainly agree
that the current and you do show in each of your shadow studies you show that the proposal
will cast additional shadows upon the rears of 2002 2004 and 2006 spring garden correct
Correct.
At 8 a.m., yes.
After that, no.
In each season, right?
So, as a matter of fact, the impact is greater in the winter because of the position of the sun, right?
All right.
So, your testimony is not that there's no impact.
The current proposal is casting a considerable impact on shadow upon not only my client's property, but 2004 and 2006 in the morning sunlight, right?
Yes and the worst case scenario is the winter on our solstice and in the winter December 21st
and this is the most time that they will have shadows and it's like four hours in a day.
Right and we can all agree that that's the case that the winter is the most extreme
impact in the summer it's the least and I'm happy to stick to that. Now
You mentioned the word, you used the word misleading with regard to our shadow study.
Did you consider that our shadow study, first of all, your shadow study,
did you include the 26-story shadow cast by City View Tower in your shadow study?
No, I didn't.
You did not.
So did you consider the fact that our shadow study actually considers
the 26-story City View Tower's impact on these properties?
I don't know.
You don't know. So isn't it fair to say that my client's architect, who included the city of Utah or shadow from the 26-story building, is more comprehensive and more accurate since it includes the other shadows cast on this property as well as your current proposal?
Thank you. Because you did include the shadow cast by the building across the street.
Yes, I did.
okay but you did not include the shadow cast by city view towers correct because in this case the
the most close building to the properties is the garage the park garage right in the shadow
the garage cast its own shadow but the city view towers is 26 stories tall
it has a considerable shadow yes but the towers start on the fifth and sixth lot to the left
on the fifth and sixth lot to the left so I didn't consider that because the sun
always stored from east to west and for us the shadows are always
covering your neighbor our neighbors property in the mornings so the towers from city view
is doing shadows afternoon and this is not relevant to us because we are analyzing him here
our proposal and your client building. So the towers are not relevant for me in this case.
Okay, they're not relevant for you, but you used the word misleading with regard to our shadow
studies. And did you consider the fact, Ms. Stanky, that our shadow studies include all of
the shadows that impact these properties? It doesn't include all of the shadows.
But we included the most significant shadow, which is a shadow cast by City View Towers, didn't we?
Yeah, but we are not analyzing City View shadows here in the proposal from the corner lot.
Well, ma'am, but you used the term misleading when you mentioned the shadows that we included in our study.
And those are more realistic and more comprehensive, are they not?
But you didn't include across the street buildings.
that create shadows on your neighbor's neighbor's property and our neighbor's property too ma'am
the shadow cast by the 20th street building across 20th street you already testified
that it doesn't reach the properties to the left of the current proposal depends of the time
are you saying that the shadow cast by the building across 20th street
yes jumps across your client's property into 2002 and 2004 yes early morning on the winter yes
ma'am how does the shadow get cast through the your structure your structure is five
stories tall in the back i can show you here this is the shadow from the across the street
right but it's the presence of that building doesn't the building across the street can't
impact it because your building blocks it right in this case yes all right so you included 20th
street you included that structure shadow but you did not include the city view tower structure right
objection we are analyzing our proposal here sorry miss miller mr chairman i object
council is beating a dead horse all right if if your client miss stanky if your client's property
um was not as where is it today and today the shadows across the street how far to the left
do they go with the current property not the proposed property with the current structure
that's there today. Does it impact 2002 and 2004? Depends of the time and the season.
Well, at certain times and certain seasons, it would impact them. It creates a shadow.
Mm-hmm. Okay. So today, okay. All right. I'm almost done, Mr. Chairman. And thank you for
your time. So, Ms. Stanky, I'd like to look at your, thank you, your winner. If you could scroll
through if you don't mind because i lack this uh this drawing but the the winter months can you
scroll through your drawings for the winter months please yeah time frames excuse me i am thank you
yeah all right so what can't we agree that i mean i think you already admitted i think we can all
agree that the the current proposal will block morning sun during the winter to my client's
property. Is that a fair assessment? Yes, it's fair. Okay. And can you scroll through to 10 and 12
and 2 p.m., please? 10. Thank you very much. 12 and 2 p.m. Okay. So isn't it fair to say,
Ms. Stanky, that, and I think your shadow study agrees with ours on this,
the presence of the current proposal will block sunlight completely from my client's rear
during the winter months agree yes okay not the full building the whole building sorry to the
rear to the rear right yes all right at 12 only at 12 o'clock um at noon we don't don't cast
shadows i i agree i agree i agree until 11 maybe i agree with you that there's other shadows
cast and that's why i got into the questioning about the comprehensiveness of the study but i
think we all agree and I think I think you're fully in agreement yes the
Yes. The presence of the new structure will completely block out sun to the rear of my client's building in the winter. Right? Objection. During certain hours. She agreed. I agreed, but I agreed also with Mr. Miller in some hours.
presence of the new structure will completely block out Sun to the rear
no i'll reframe it so the record's clear i understand the difference you're making i agree
what you're saying i'm not there's other shadows cast by other structures right right i agree but
what i'm saying is before the construction of this proposal my client has sun to the rear of
her property in the winter morning and that will be removed by this proposal right yes
the intermediate lot needs to be aware that sometimes you can have another building on the
corner i understand but i think we all agree i think you said you agreed and i'm not saying
all it's all your building but in the winter months this proposal will cut off the only
sunlight it gets which is in the morning yes on this this slide that i'm showing here the
the blue part is the last floor so the blue is the pilot house that long and
that this last floor we can see this is the last floor and this is the pilot
house the pilot house is easy to be removed and can be used something like
this some lights that can be opened and doesn't need to be built this is
something that could be resolved like easily by a different structure and this last floor is the
this covering here and blue and if by right this building was built with 38 feet your client will
have this shadow cast anyway right right but the blue and the yellow that you show will not
be there right let me let me ask mr miller question miss stanky brought up something
interesting has your client given any consideration to removing the pilot house and having
a staircase or some other means to get to the roof i'm not aware of any uh discussion of that
issue mr chairman thank you because it seems to me that that would be significantly reduce any
shadows the two uh as it relates to 2002 as far as the top top floor of 2002
uh mr chairman i appreciate your suggestion but it would not solve the the major issue which would
be the impact on the rear facade it's i understand but you you raised you raised the issue about the
shadows, which are in blue. Ms. Stanky said that's caused by the pilot house. Right. And according
to her, if that pilot house were removed, that blue area of shadow would go, most likely go away.
At that time frame, yes. At that time frame, sure. Yeah. Two hours later, we don't have any,
any shadow. So I'm through with Ms. Stanky. Thank you very much.
Miller I don't have any follow-up questions okay thank you anyone else
questions from the board
no no no
I'll ask again is there anyone else who wishes to testify in this case if so please raise your hand
Oh, I didn't know Mr. Miller rested his case.
We have plenty of witnesses for our case.
All right.
I have not rested.
Right.
He said he didn't have any further questions at this time.
I got ahead of myself.
I apologize.
So, Mr. DeMarco and or Mr. Miller, if you have witnesses, I would ask,
and I know I'm going to have to repeat this a few times, something new and different.
when your clients get on to testify please offer something new and different
thank you bye raise your hand at this time so you can be recognized
well i'm gonna i have witnesses but um mr miller's not finished so he's not he's
right mr miller yes sir yes mr chairman uh my next witness is rowan shrine
just for clarification that's the owner right the developer right
no that's the sister of the developer oh okay sorry
he has an interest in this property she's going to be a a resident
she's going to be a resident oh she's unmuted for you to square her in
yes hi good morning ma'am or good afternoon whatever time it is um please spell your first
and last name for the record sure so my first name is rowan r-a-w-a-n as in nancy last name
is S-H-R-A-I-M as in Mary. Do you want to affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing
but the truth? I do. Thank you, Mr. Miller. Please proceed. Thank you. Rowan, thank you for testifying
today. Of course. Rowan, where do you live now? I live at 2200 Benjamin Franklin Parkway with my
parents. Okay, and how long have you been a Philadelphian? So it's an interesting story. So
I've been in Philly. I moved for college nine years ago, but my family has lived in this
neighborhood since before I moved for college. My brothers came here for school, and so I've
actually been in this area and in this neighborhood for, I want to say, most of my life, about 20
years, so most of my teenager life, most of my beginning adult life. Okay, and where do you work
now? I work at the Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, and I'm also doing my PhD at
Drexel University. And what do you do at CHOP? I work in the immunology and gastroenterology
department. I work for their research department, and I do genetics research, which is also what
my PhD is in. Okay, and what is your understanding of the purpose for the acquisition of 2000
and Spring Garden Street. Sure. So just to give a little bit of an introduction without being
taking too much time. So thank you for letting me speak today. But, you know, my family and I,
as I explained, have lived in this area and in this neighborhood for quite some time now. It's
been our home for a very long time, and it's very near and dear to our heart. And this community has
been our community for a very long time. We've been renters in this area for as long as we've
lived there, and so we were very excited to be owners during once Rami purchased this property.
We've always envisioned building our home in this community, and being able to purchase this
property and build on it has, you know, kind of made that vision come to life, which has been
very exciting for me and my entire family. This is, you know, it's where we've been for a very
long time. And so to us, this is more than just a property. This is really what we've been wanting
for a very long time. And we've been very excited about it. You know, we went when Rami first
purchased this property. I need to interrupt if I could with all due respect. We appreciate the
fact that you live in Philadelphia and you good work at at CHOP and I understand I think I know
where Mr. Miller is saying going to be saying that the family will be occupying a unit or two in this
building that's all well and good but that could change at some point people may decide to leave
we hope you don't leave the city we hope you stay I hope I don't leave either I I would just ask that
you summarize please yeah sure yeah i was coming to the end of it i want to i want to save everyone
time yeah how many how many of your family intend to live in this property um so i intend to live
there rami intends to live there my parents intend to live there and one of my other brothers also
intends to live there okay so that's four separate units yes and there's five units in the building
Those are all my questions.
Any cross?
Just a single question, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you.
Thank you for your testimony, Ms. Schreim.
Circumstances can change, and you could find the opportunity to live in a different or bigger house,
and you could take advantage of that in the future, correct?
Definitely.
I think that's true for everyone.
That's also true for our neighbor.
Thank you.
No further questions.
Can I add one more very last comment, if possible?
Be very short.
Please.
So I know during the last meeting, there was a lot of conversation about Nextdoor.
I was the one that posted about Nextdoor.
And, you know, Nextdoor is a very, it's a very big community of people that come together
who live within the same community and post about a lot of different things,
whether it be projects, businesses, you know, things going around the community.
And I think it was very much undermined during the last meeting, whether it be, you know, saying that, oh, it was random people.
We don't know if they actually live in the area.
You know, I do urge the committee to take those posts pretty, you know, seriously because it is.
to take those posts pretty um you know seriously because it is at this point i have to object
it is hearsay thank you thank you all right thank you for letting me speak i appreciate it
thank you and good luck with your career mr miller yes if i can have two seconds offline
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
My next witness is Rami Shraim.
Would you please spell your full name for the sonographer?
Hello, everyone. My name is Ramy Shraim, R-A-M-Y-S-H-R-A-I-M.
Are you swearing for him to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
There you go.
We're going to have some feedback, so I think I'm going to silence my microphone,
and I'll be asking questions. Hopefully, you'll hear me through Mr. Shraim's microphone.
Are you able to hear me?
Mr. Chairman, can you hear me speaking now?
Yeah, a little bit closer or louder and would help be a little bit muffled.
All right.
I'm sorry, we're using that.
Mr. Schroeder, would you introduce yourself to the panel?
Yes, my name is Rami Shrine. I actually moved to Philadelphia in 2000. I moved to go to Drexel University. And I actually lived in the neighborhood. I moved to 2001 Hamilton Street, which is City View today, which is directly to the south of the property.
I lived there for a number of years and you know before moving across the street across the parkway
to 2200 Benjamin Franklin Parkway so just like my sister said we've I've been living in the
neighborhood for for the last one years almost and just like she said we love this neighborhood
we've enjoyed living there and we've always dreamt of having our own home since we've been
renters all of our life so again when this opportunity came we were very excited and
And I actually remember, you know, the same month that I purchased the property, I scheduled a meeting with Ms. Pat Freeman, which is the president of the Spring Garden Civic Association, to come in, introduce myself, introduce my family, and introduce the projects and my plans and what I'm looking to do.
And I remember leaving the meeting really happy and excited on how well we were received.
You know, I brought my father, my brother, and my sister with me to the meeting.
that feeling of excitement quickly changed unfortunately when my next door neighbor
at 2002 you know made it very clear from day one that she was unhappy that there was a development
happening next door and was just you know trying everything there is to try to delay and derail
the project. We went through the historical approval process, which was very long and very
costly. And we did a number of changes. As Mr. Miller indicated earlier, we've changed the project
about five times, you know, taking into consideration all the feedback that we took
from the RCO and members of the community. And, you know, finally, when we presented the final
project. It was approved by the historical commission. And I remember the very first
thing I did after the approval was I contacted my neighbor, Molly Gallagher. And I basically
let her know that, look, we're going to be next door neighbors. I'm moving with my entire family.
I want to have a good neighborly relationship. And let's please put our differences aside.
and unfortunately the first thing she did was appeal the the decision and and here we are
today and I know you're you're going to hear a lot of testimonies and and a lot of different
opinions some supporting and some opposing and just would you know hopefully as my sister indicated
also I think the the one disappointing thing was that the RCO just you know very blindly and
biasly took the side of one neighbor and is just opposing the project at all costs.
I urge the board to please look at some of the open forums just like nextdoor.com to
at some of the open forums just like nextdoor.com to see that there is in fact support from a lot
see that there is.
of neighbors that same objection there is hearsay they're getting into hearsay that there is
that there is in fact uh people feel that there is an improvement chairman
objection okay my objection okay um and and i just you know what the the real like you know
beyond all the all the noise that that's being made the the facts are that the the two variances
that we're seeking here number one the height which was recommended and approved by historical
commission so that we could match the next door neighbor and the rest of the box the second
variance is the parking which today the property today has an existing 50 foot curb cut today we
are reducing this curb cut to almost half which will give the community parking spots so that is
obviously an improvement these are the only two variances that we are seeking uh i feel that the
the objections uh and the opposition is very unreasonable and very unfair to a you know is
there some kind of a suggested easement to a view to a street uh our property is a corner property
it is on rm1 which by code allows you to build on 80 percent of the property we are well below that
and we have again as we change uh the the design through the historical process have reduced
the the the length of the property and set it back as you can see to accommodate for it for
the neighbors but it's just it's i feel like it's there's nothing that we can do and and it's never
enough but again by code 80 is where an rm1 property is allowed and they're objecting to that
so i i just and i know this is not the end of the battle for us i know that just like they
appeal the historical commission no matter what your decision is today they're gonna appeal it
and all i can do this of this stuff mr chairman come on all i can do is continue to tell my story
in an honest and truthful way
and hope that my dream
and my family's dream
of owning a home
in this neighborhood
that we've lived in for 20 years
will become true.
I thank you very much
and I appreciate your time today.
Thank you, sir.
Is that it?
Mr. Miller?
Anyone else?
I have cross-examination.
I just want to make sure.
Yeah, I know.
Mr. DeMarco.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Schramm, good morning. So you feel you're being treated unfairly with this matter?
Yes, very.
Okay, okay. Have you offered any compromise proposal to my client at any time?
Objection. The documents that we've provided demonstrate compromise after compromise.
Mr. Chairman, gentlemen, gentlemen, gentlemen, gentlemen, I'll ask the question a different way.
Mr. DeMarco, has your client offered any suggestions to Mr. Schaum?
My client's been very clear that the cornice line is not the objection.
It is the massing of this property.
It's been very clear from Jump Street.
There's been no offer at all to mitigate the height variance in this case.
other than threats cajoles calling my client evil and attacking my client my client's not
the only person opposed also there's a widespread opposition to this we understand that mr chairman
the the process that we went through through the historical commission which again you saw earlier
in the presentation shows that this project took five different changes uh where where it went from
a a five-story building to a four-story building meeting the next door a height going and going
that has been made a number of units also mr sean
we're aware of what you're saying mr sean we want something new and different that's all
all right the question was has the has the witness offered a compromise to my client
not to the commission. He hasn't answered the question. Rami, you can unmute yourself
and please stop talking over each other. Thank you. Thank you. I apologize. Yes, my answer is
yes, we have through the reducing of the massing of the building, all the setbacks that you see
on the rear, reducing the number of units from seven, which is a bi-right RM1 that with the
reducing the number of units from seven which is a buy right rm1 that with the with the size that
we have today we have seven units by right we reduce it to five and we reduce the massing of
the building like i said we are below the 80 coverage on the lot which is the buy code the
rm1 uh uh by code uh that that is allowable we are below that so yes we have to answer your
question you didn't answer my question mr shreem i'm going to ask it again and try to be as clear
as possible those changes that you just described were made because you were trying to get historical
commission approval correct uh not true that actually the historical commission in in our
first submission um the architectural committee um had comments and refused the project but the
staff of the historical commission approved the the initial uh building which was a much larger
massing than what it is today right so you read and we have a letter stating that as well okay
you reduced the density and the the the massing of your property in order because you were denied
by the architecture committee of the historical commission correct we we were we were made
understand by the historical commission and specifically laura who was the staff member
that we were working on that we actually reduced the massing of the building beyond what the
Historical Commission would have liked to see or wanted to approve. We would have been able to
approve a larger building, but yet we continued to reduce that. And if you see the timing of the
reduction or the setbacks in the back, that happened after communications between us and
the RCO and the neighbor back and forth in between the RCO. I'm sorry, between the Historical
commission. So we did do that. Thank you for sharing this. So as you can see there, if you
look at the building, that is the evolution of the building. It was a much larger, a lot more
massing in the front and in the back. And we continued to reduce that even between, like I
said, historical meetings. That was really not to please historical, but that is more to answer
the feedback from the RCO and the neighbor. Mr. Shreem, did you offer any concession to my client?
Ever? Yes, I'm happy to repeat what I just said all over again. No, I don't want you to talk about
the historical commission. Have you offered a compromise proposal to my client? Mr. DeMarco,
your client was part of that historical commission. We met with the RCO and with your
client and your client attended the staff and architectural committee meetings and gave her
feedback and requested what she wanted. So our working with the historical commission and the
architectural committee was in line with what your client wanted because she was present at
the hearings. You were present as well and you testified and she testified and we went back and
we did changes following the architectural committee so yes we did uh and and and again
i can't i can repeat that one more time if you go uh i don't think we need no he's not all right
well i'll move on mr chairman i think the point is made uh mr shreem when you purchased this
property you purchased it in february of or march of uh 2019 right correct all right and the current
property uh was occupied at the time right correct all right there were tenants in there
and how many units was is was the current is the current property uh five but so the um those
those units were occupied by residential or commercial tenants right correct and they were
paying rent right correct okay so the proper the current property is income producing so to speak
is that fair to say yes it was the day i purchased it and before that yes okay thank you
so you had purchased the property with the intention to demolish the existing structure
and replace it with a larger uh property correct correct with my home for myself and my family
correct fair enough but your intention was to demolish the current use and replace it with a
larger and more and more larger uh greater uh leasable area is that fair to say correct the
current building is only two stories uh that is the only two-story building in that block and the
following block so obviously sure i wanted to demolish it and build a larger building that
is going to be a home for myself and my family yes okay fair enough and so during that process
your architects were able to obtain for you a permit over the counter for a seven unit
38 story building agreed yeah yes so actually that permit was obtained if you look at do you
have a copy of that permit since you of course i'm sure you do yes can you please look up the
date on that permit i believe it was last year please if you can put
i believe it was last year please if you can pull up the permit thank you so much
so what is the date on that permit february 19th 2019 right uh you're not allowed to ask me
questions mr shreem go ahead if you're answering my question i'll let you go if you're going to
answer okay i'll answer i'll answer so that permit was obtained february 2019 a month before i
purchased the property and it was obtained if you look at the applicant's name that was the
entity that owns that property the reason for that permit is I wanted to question because I
wasn't sure what I can if I can build or develop a home for myself or my family there so I asked
the owners if they can submit for a permit to see what you know if I can actually build because I
was actually unsure I've never developed in a historical district I've never gone through this
process before so that was just me inquiring before i purchased that was my homework before
i purchased the property to see what am i able or what am i allowed um um to build there by right
and that's why they submitted this permit prior to to me purchasing the property that was a month
before i purchased well hold on mr shreem the the applicant is mr kang right the apple yes permit
is mr that's your architect right yes he helped the gentleman on the property to do to obtain the
yes mr mr shreem it was your architect that was the applicant you directed him to obtain this
right you were the yes it was an agreement with myself and the owners of the property before i
purchased the property to see if i can actually build something on there fair enough you were
involved with the process you you directed yes absolutely i was okay you wanted to know what was
allowed as of right right that is correct all right so you could physically build this building
it's not what you want but you could build this building you could build this building right away
that's reflected in this permit right uh no i couldn't uh and the simple reason for that is
it was very obviously clearly communicated to us by the historical commission that
But what's going to go on there is going to be similar to what's next door.
And that's why we went through the approval of the historical process.
I think we established.
He already said it.
This is what he's doing.
He keeps talking, so he gets it in, Mr. Chairman.
Objection.
Mr. Chairman, Mr. DeMarco doesn't allow the witness to finish.
Mr. DeMarco doesn't like the answer, and he tries to withdraw.
all right gentlemen we we have i believe a significant number of other witnesses
uh we want to get this done today but we're running up against the clock we have a two
o'clock session uh staff needs a break so uh i mean i don't unless we're going to continue this
i would really like to see if we can get to the meat heart to the meat of this issue my understanding
is, as a buy right, he can build seven apartments and amass 80% of the lot. Correct? He's doing
fewer apartments and not taking advantage of the 80%. That is correct, Your Honor.
You're absolutely correct. May I continue with my cross? It's very important that I get this
stuff in this is a very important call all right so mr shram with regard to this over-the-counter
permit uh you never sought to go to the historical commission with this proposal right
you just talked about feedback that you got you never actually submitted it correct
no we actually met with the the same actually i have to i have to see my records i met with the
one of the staff it was an informal informal meeting with laura where the staff member at
the historical commission to ask them and i'm pretty sure i actually did meet with them before
i purchased the property met with her and she explained to me what what would what she believes
will be will be approved and that was not answering the question and he's getting more hearsay in
the question is did you submit it the question is very simple did you submit the over-the-counter
project to the commission for consideration no but i did discuss it with the um uh the answer is no
right all right very good answer is no yes very good so the over-the-counter permit would have
more units right would have that is correct yes okay um but you're not interested in that project
because it's not as much rentable area is that fair to say no not at all i i again i am trying
to build my house my home for myself for my family this is not an investment property this is a home
so that's why that's what i'm doing with it but it could turn out it could be an investment property
So that's why, that's what I'm doing with it.
But it could turn out to, it could be an investment property.
Sure, sure.
It could be short.
So Mr. Schramm, as far as the massing of the property, the massing of the building,
it's certainly physically possible for you to just seek a height variance for the cornice line of the property
and then step your building back to match the other properties on the block.
Couldn't you do that physically?
I don't know.
I would have to spend another four or five months going through the historical commission.
Then I can get back to you and answer it.
Who knows?
But it's fair to say that you certainly could propose a building that matches the mass.
You could certainly propose anything.
Sorry?
You can certainly propose anything.
Well, no, I have a specific question, which is you could match the massing of my client's property and the other properties on the block if you wanted to, right?
Let's stipulate that that's a possibility. He can do that.
Well, Mr. Chairman, I need this for the record.
He's saying yes.
If he's going to stipulate, that's fine.
I wouldn't do that for the simple reason is that my zoning for my property is an R1, which allows me to build 80% of my property.
So why would I build 50% if I'm allowed 80%?
The answer to your question is because you would not need a height variance for the entirety of the building.
You could actually seek a height variance only for the front part of the building, couldn't you?
Sure, I could.
And there's nothing physically preventing you from doing that, right?
Nothing unique about this property that prevents you.
Physically?
Physically.
there's nothing physically yes or no it's a yes or no question
physically no rationally though i would have a yes or no question all right let's let's move yeah
okay no
so did you threat did you you mentioned you brought into the record mr shreem conversations with my
client did you did you did you threaten my client with litigation for her opposition in this case
Do you threaten your clients? No.
Do you threaten her with litigation?
Do you call her names, call her evil?
I'm sorry, Chair, if I could just mention, we can go to 1 p.m., okay?
I was just going to ask you that. Okay, thank you.
I'm almost done, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Schramm, are you aware that the individual who posted the orange zoning poster back in March for the RCO meeting in this project took a picture and then removed it?
Are you aware of that?
No further questions, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you.
Mr. Miller.
I have a brief question, Mr. Chairman.
Ryan Bolin.
Oh, Brian, I'm sorry.
I just wanted to clarify one point.
Mr. Schrein, you testified before that there's only two variances.
Is that accurate?
No, that is not accurate.
There's a third variance for the roof deck not being set back out of 20th Street.
Is that correct?
I'm sorry, Mr. Miller.
Mr. Chairman, the...
didn't we not discuss that at the last uh go around mr chairman the variances that we seek
are a matter of record or a matter of what they're a matter of record
mr chairman i just want to clarify for the board that there was some testimony that was inaccurate
that there's only two variances there was a third variance that was forgotten about
which is because the roof decks are not set back five feet off of 20th street
it's not just
it's not just the rooftops
it's the balconies
and chairman may I add
this was a result again of the historical
commission
asking us to remove
the roof on there which created
variance
that's been established
and when you establish
that the front of 2000 Spring Garden
Street is Spring Garden Street
that variance is gone, no longer exists. So for the record please that's all I
have Mr. Chairman. I'll refrain from my other questions and move this along. Thank
you Boland. Who's up next? Mr. Miller? Mr. Chairman, Mr. Schrein was my last
Mr. Chairman, Mr. Schrein is my last witness. I move the admission of all my exhibits.
Mr. DeMarco.
I only have a handful of objections. Part of Mr. Miller's exhibits are these online
comments from alleged people in the area. That should not be consideration by this board.
it's all hearsay it's it's triple double and triple hearsay noted that's my you know that's
my you know i'd ask that you note my objection to standing from the city view letter the guy
that wrote it's not doesn't even live there other than that i'm not going to quibble about the rest
of the exhibits some of them were submitted less than five days but i've taken the liberty to do
that myself so i'm not going to object to documents submitted within the five days because i'll
reserve the right to have my exhibits as well but those are my main objections to the hearsay
the petition i'd also object to it's got very few people in the area but i guess i i would let the
petition in but ask you to consider the locations with the signatures and but i do not want the
uh next door online commentary be part of the record thank you so noted mr chairman if i may
add the the president of the city view uh association al perry has also submitted a
letter he lives he's a resident of city i think i think i believe we heard from
the city view folks at the last hearing i'm not sure it was the manager i remember hearing someone
from City View. It was Mr. Hamler that's correct Mr. Chairman. Thank you. All right.
Gentlemen, Mr. DeMarco, Mr. Bolin, anything to add before I go ask the board if there's any
questions? Yeah we have our case Mr. Chairman but we'll wait till you're ready.
How long do you think we're going to need? We have as witnesses we have Janice Woodcock
who's our architect and the one who's been attacked for misleading people we have we have
molly gallagher who's the uh the representative of the uh the company that opens owns the property
next door um the rco has witnesses two other witnesses have were uh have asked to speak
um and lisa hastings it's the policy of this board has always been to give everyone an
opportunity to be heard right i believe and correct me if i'm wrong that at the last when
we last heard this case miss wilcox i believe testified am i correct in that or no or am i
did not testify she did not no i'm thinking of another case then yeah all right is there any
other any of the other witnesses that you just mentioned have they spoken at the last
go-around no sir kathleen harleman is the other witness that we've identified so we have five
we have three formal witnesses but two others have asked to speak today and that's bob sutton
and lisa hastings that's not including the rcl that's that these folks not repeat what has
already been said not only today but at the prior hearing so let's call call your people on
i'd like to start with janice woodcock mr chairman unless please do all right
janice are you with us
i have to unmute her can you hear me yes yes hi janice uh please spell your full name for the
record janice woodcock j-a-n-i-c-e w-o-o-d-c-o-c-k thank you you swear and affirm to tell the truth
the whole truth and nothing but the truth i will sir and you're testifying as a representative of
rco no i'm no okay of mooring properties okay thank you mr chairman in order to preserve time
i know you're pressed for it um you know i can have janice speak about her qualifications she's
testified at this board before as an expert and we'll stipulate we'll slip stipulate to that very
well that's going to streamline things thank you um janice uh good morning good afternoon um
You're a, you've been hired by my client to present an expert opinion in this matter, correct?
Correct.
And if you as an expert were asked to, and you're being paid for your services, correct?
Correct.
So if you were asked to present an opinion that you didn't agree with, would you refuse to do so?
I would.
Okay. So let's do this. Did you prepare a written report in this matter?
So let's do this.
I did.
Okay. Well, why don't you do this? First, let's tell the board what you looked at, what you did,
and then I'll ask you to summarize your report and let's have you share your screen so you can
refer to it. But let's first answer the question, what did you do as a result of this
this job that we that molly and mooring hired you to do i i visited the site and looked at the
neighborhood i used the applicant's drawings to prepare models that would take a look at the
impact of the project both visually and in terms of light and air and i put i made a report that
describes the relationship of the proposed project to the criteria in the zoning board
code that the criteria for granting a variance
and you prepared a written report did you uh reach uh opinions in that report i did and did
you reach those conclusions within a reasonable degree of professional certainty i did okay so
But let's share your screen, and why don't you summarize the conclusions in your report?
And then I'm going to ask you to refer to your boards, but let's do that first.
Can we do that?
While I'm getting the report up on the screen, I would just like to start so that we save
The report, it lists the nine criteria that are used for granting a dimensional variance,
and five of them are most relevant the rest of them are for larger projects that that affect
larger infrastructure so they're not really relevant so i'd like to run through quickly
the five that are most important and i'll frame them in terms of questions first will the denial
of this variance create a hardship and was the need for the variance created by the applicant
i believe that it was the decision of the owner to build more density on the site than is necessary
necessary than it would be to have a viable development, and if no variants were granted,
a viable project would still be possible.
In other words, the owner created the need for the variants.
Second, will the variants represent the minimum necessary to afford relief?
I believe that the viable residential project that could be built with sun and views would
be certainly able to be constructed on this lot without a variance.
indeed there are 18 similar properties on the block that demonstrate this point and on top of
that this this has an added advantage of the city view third is the granting of this variance in
harmony with the spirit and purpose of the zoning code section 14101 lists 15 points expressing
the purpose of the zoning code the project violates three number one protecting light and air
Number two, protecting the character of the neighborhood.
And number three, preserving the quality of life of the public realm.
And here I'm referring to the streetscape and parking.
Fourth, will the granting of the variance substantially or permanently injure or impair adequate light and air to an adjacent conforming property?
Again, this project will substantially and permanently affect the views and shadows on the adjacent property at 2002 Spring Garden, which is conforming.
finally to find unusual hardship in the case of a dimensional variance the
zoning board may consider economic detriment to the applicant if the
variance is denied in the financial burden by any work required to bring the
project into compliance well there is no physical aspect of this property that
creates a hardship the lot is deep it sits on a prominent corner with again
skyline views it will not cost the owner anything to reduce the height of this
project to fit the height limit or to match adjacent structures nor would it
be expensive to design the parking properly this last point reinforces
where we started that the need for a variance has been granted by the
applicants own design has been generated excuse me by the applicants own design
decisions and not by any dimensional or physical condition I'd be happy to to
show you the graphics um but i think the board has had these for a long time and i in the interest
of time i'd be happy to answer any questions thank you any the board have any questions for miss
Does the board have any questions for Ms. Woodcock?
This will cut.
Ms. Woodcock?
This would cut.
Mr. Miller?
I'm not finished.
I'm not finished.
I'm sorry.
I'm sorry.
Well, the way Janice described it, I thought you were finished.
Well, she has to, you know, she's been, listen, Mr. Chairman, I don't want to belabor.
The problem is she's been attacked for some of her conclusions.
So I need her to explain because, you know, there was an issue with the rendering that she prepared.
Continue, continue.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
But I want to do this with all good speed.
I'm sorry?
I just hope that it can be done quickly because I have prepared comments on what was said about my graphics and about this.
Please, go right ahead.
Okay, for the graphics, I believe that both drawings are so similar to be de minimis.
and also that the the idea that that one was trying to deceive the other you can
clearly see in both renderings that were I prepared and the other parties
prepared that the building extends far beyond 41% beyond the the 2002 spring
garden so that's having to do with the rendering Janice can you show your
screen to are you able to share screen to it didn't set it no so well I mean I
I'll bring that rendering up while I'm talking.
All right.
Secondly, I want to go over the impact of sun on the, well.
Please, I can let you do your thing.
I don't need to, you can go ahead.
All right.
Again, I could show my videos and we could be entertained,
but let me just explain mathematically the impact of the sun on 2002 Spring Garden.
in the spring and fall there's a total of 12 daylight hours this project will block 42 percent
of them and another four are blocked by the tower so that means when this project is constructed
there will only be three hours of remaining sunlight that's in the spring and fall in the
summer the project only removes 29 of the sunlight on 2002 spring garden there are 15 and a half
daylight hours and zero of them are blocked by the tower and just four and a half are blocked
by the proposed project in the winter can i ask you to put that put that on your on your screen
please okay if you would are you able to or yeah it just takes a minute and i know how dear the
time is right but you need they need to see what your your work okay because i don't know we're
they're gonna have time to see it otherwise and you can during that you
can show the city view the impact of the city view and respond to the complaints
from Ms. Stanky about your shadow study, please.
Okay, first we'll do spring and fall,
and let me get my share screen set up.
Thank you.
We did show a 24-hour clock and we did that because you need to see how much daylight is
available in the whole day. We're not trying to deceive anybody about anything. But what's
amazing is when you look at the impact of the sun in adjacent buildings and we
look at the city view tower that tower is 314 feet which we also got from Google
Earth and amazingly the shadows cast by that tower do do not overlap the
shadows that are done by the adjacent project so here you can see in the red
what the impact is and what about the the complaint that your shadow study
somehow misleads because you included nighttime and the shadows classed by the
city of Utah or how do you respond to that as I said the I think that my chart
in fact was used by the other side to explain what the impact was because it
was so clear again the reason to show 24 hours is we need to know how many hours
are available and with that I just like to move to the winter sure here you can
see that there's very there's a lot fewer daylight hours and the red it represents
and the red it represents the morning sun which we all agree are the four hours that
will be taken away by the proposed project what wasn't as clear but you can see in this graphic
is that those are the only hours except for a tiny sliver here that are available to the project so
basically available to the to to the neighboring to the neighboring product to 2002 spring garden
So while we could say, well, we don't really care about the other towers,
this is not what we're talking about today,
I just want to make clear that when you have access to sunlight,
then you have this many hours, four to four and a half hours of sunlight available,
and you take all of it away, I think that is a significant impact.
And that would place my client's property into total darkness during the winter, right?
Correct. Except for that one sliver. Okay. Let's show the board where you compare
less impactful variants. And we can move quickly here, but do you, can you, you know the board I'm
talking about where you show the more sensitive proposal versus the current? Okay. Are you able
to show that board that's it
it's the wrong version well that's that's okay that's the one though i got it yeah
okay um so tell the board uh when you say when you use the term appropriate um
explain that to the board please appropriate would mean that it's fine to have a tall building
a 50 foot tall building next to another one on Spring Garden Street but the the
pattern in the neighborhood it gives the neighborhood its character is that
these buildings step down and they step back from the street in fact when we
describe the building across the street from 2000 Spring Garden is being you
know massive and tall and why not why can't we do it too we didn't we left off
a few details that building is set back it doesn't it's set back from the side
street and this building is not so it is in the details unfortunately what gives
neighborhood its character so appropriate in this graphic we're showing
a stepped building it still has it still it still has a lot of density and it's
it just doesn't go back on lot as far as the neighbors so explain to the
board you mentioned the concept of of the least minimum you know variance and the impact um
as in your analysis was there any facts that you've heard and during you've been involved
with all the testimony is there anything unusual unique about this property which would prevent
the applicant from seeking a lesser height variance and what i mean by that is where the
height variance would not be throughout the depth of the property and it would could step back like
the other properties have you heard anything to that effect no in effect the opposite is true
because this this is a unusual lot and it is a corner lot with an incredible exposure to
to the sun it it is it's it would be easy to do a lot less density but still have a wonderful place
to to live so i feel like um it is again the design decisions of the applicant's architect
that and the applicant himself that have created the need for the variance.
Can I ask a question of Ms. Wilcox?
In your professional opinion, 2000 Spring Garden,
how far back would each of the floors have to be set back in order not to,
in order to provide the sunlight to 2002?
You understand that question?
um if you don't have it now that's fine i have it here i have a site plan the the building right
now is 120 feet deep at the bottom and it's and it's the longest step yes i'm talking about the
proposed project now i'll give you the map okay it's 120 feet deep and it's its first step back
is five feet at the bottom. And the next one steps back looks like another approximately 10.
steps back looks like another approximately 10 feet, and then we're up
high, another 12 feet. If all of those setbacks were, first of all, if you
did it the opposite, if you set back a lot at the lower level so that there
would be less building mass right behind 2002 Spring Garden, that would
that would help the access to light and air and it would also be consistent with
the other buildings on the block they all step back and most of them are only
tall at the first like third of the building so that again if those kinds of
design revisions were made that would help and finally there aren't any other
hardly that I saw I mean I'm not going to say that there's not any but there
are very few pilot houses on this block and so that's a feature that is just a
brand new and unfortunately impactful element on the project so I'll uh going to ask are you
finished with that board Ms. Janis yeah but let me remind everyone we're the bewitching hours coming
up we have three minutes and we have to make a break for stay and this has to do with the city
uh in terms of employees having a one hour lunch period etc all right so we're going to have to
We're going to continue this to another date.
Right.
I just, I understand.
I just want to make sure the applicant got their full, their full time to put on their
I want to just make sure I get the same.
I'm just asking for the same.
So let me, let me ask, uh, I'm going to ask Janice to stop.
I'm going to bring up one of the applicants exhibits and ask her to respond.
Uh, so I'm going to go ahead and I've been able to share screen, right?
Yes, I am.
Janice, why don't you respond to this?
There was a lot of criticism of your rendering.
Why don't you respond and state, in your opinion, what's going on with your rendering?
What's your response to their criticisms of it?
Again, I think that both of the renderings make the same point.
but you can there's actually includes the the scaffolding on the back of 2002
spring garden so the shape of the yellow looks less deep than my rendering how I
did my rendering was I took the applicants drawings and used their
dimensions I had accurate lot lines there is a little discrepancy on the
pilothouse but again I believe that's de minimis and I'd be happy to stipulate
that their pilot house is correct. I don't think it would change a thing about the impact of the
property. It's just the way the graphics are done, the style of the graphics.
So the parking, can you comment on the feasibility of the layout of the parking in the rear? That's
one of the variances that issue in this case is for that curb cut. Can you mention to the board
your concerns regarding how uh the layout of the parking uh can be problematic well it doesn't it's
not in accordance with the zoning code it is um it's not it's got it's too deep uh according to
the zoning code's own standards so it actually should have been a refusal um there's also the
impact of having a car go off of the city street which is not permitted so um finally parking
doesn't work very well because you have to stack the cars in order to park all three vehicles let
me let me mr demarco mr i am really truly sorry to have to interrupt it is one o'clock okay we're
going to get through this so i only have about 10 15 more minutes so i can promise you that when
when we reconvene janice i'll finish with janice uh and let me ask mr miller any idea how much time
you will need and Mr. Boland going forward because we have two dates that are available.
Mr. Chairman this is Ryan Boland I need no more than five minutes possibly two minutes.
And I know it's hard to be specific but generally how much time do you think you will need?
Let me ask the three of you do you think we can get this done in one hour?
i think it can be done all right because we have november the 10th at two o'clock we can give you
one hour for testimony only or december the 1st at 2 p.m gives you a little bit more time on that
date a little between one and two hours i'll i'll uh you know i'll suggest that we take we take the
hour i would just ask the board uh you know we spend many hours on the applicant's case i would
is if we happen to run over the one hour, I'd ask that we'd be able to complete, that's all.
I'd ask that we'd be able to complete.
That's all.
But I'm happy to try to do it in an hour, Mr. Chairman.
But I'm happy to try to do it in an hour, Mr. Chairman.
All right.
Again, I didn't mean to interrupt.
We're going to have to hold off.
It's after 1 o'clock now.
So MI-2020-000695, 2000 Spring Garden Street is continued to November the 10th at 2 p.m.
Maximum one hour.
Will this be a special
Mr. Chairman?
No, we have other
cases scheduled.
We just, there's just
too many. We got a thousand cases backlog.
We just have to do
as best we can. All right.
Thank you all.
Thank you.
Thank you for your time, everybody.
I'll see you guys back at 2 o'clock.
Thank you.
You got it.
Good afternoon everyone.
Before we begin, our two o'clock session, Ms. Sunkit, Tanya, do you have anything?
We'll give you a couple of minutes.
Excuse me.
Yes, Chair, I think we're ready to go.
Everybody should be here.
okay professor yep Tom is here Jim's here okay okay good afternoon everyone my name is Frank
DiCicco I'm the chair of the zoning board of adjustment I'll be participating in today's
hearing along with our board secretary confessor plaza and board members Mr. Thomas Holloman and
Mr. James Snell. Board Administrator Tanya Sunkit and Board Attorney Shailen Saleta are also in
attendance. For those of you who haven't yet participated in our virtual hearings, I'll go
through some of the basics of what you can expect. First, we will be administering oaths to
individual participants prior to their testimony. Second, for the benefit of anyone participating
by phone, we ask that attorneys and witnesses identify themselves prior to speaking or testify.
Third, we'd like to advise everyone that this proceeding is being recorded and that by
participating you acknowledge your agreement to be recorded. Fourth, anyone participating by phone,
if you wish to testify, you must raise your hand by hitting star nine and then star six to
unmute yourself i'll repeat pardon me for anyone participating by phone if you wish to testify you
must raise your hand by hitting star nine and then star six to unmute yourself finally to enter an
appearance statement call google 267-270-5548 and leave your email address and the address of
the property at issue. I will repeat that as well. To enter an appearance statement, call Google
267-270-5548 and leave your email address and the address of the property at issue.
With that being said, we can begin, but I'd first like to ask if anyone is requesting a continuance
or withdrawal of an appeal listed for this afternoon session. If so, please raise your hand
and if you could give us the page of the case that you want continued or withdrawn that would
be helpful in addition to the address chair i have rachel pritzker good afternoon rachel uh
you're still under oath from this morning okay please proceed uh rachel r-a-c-h-a-e-l
Pritzker, P-R-I-T-Z-K-E-R, 1635 Market Street, Suite 1600, Philadelphia, PA, 19103.
I represent the applicant for 646 North 32nd Street.
I don't have access to the page number.
We'll find it.
Number six.
Thank you.
You're welcome.
what what hold on one second oh i got my i got the wrong sheet i'm sorry
i'm looking at 3 30. i apologize let me get the two o'clock list sorry about that all good
okay 6 46 north 32nd you're asking for requesting a continuance yeah i'd like it
646 north 32nd you're asking for requesting a continuance yeah i'd like to request a continuance
and leave the board to amend our application um we met with the rco and they wanted us to see if
we could figure out how to do parking on the site so we'd like to um we're going to have to obtain
additional variances in order to make that happen but we we want to explore that in order to meet
the community's concerns so we're going to need a continuance and then leave the board to amend
because we're going to need a new refusal okay thank you is there anyone objecting to the request
for this continuance um i was this is tanya i wanted to ask if rachel wanted to be the moving
party on this yes please tanya thank you thank you for clearing that up thank you
so uh mi-2020-000447 646 north 32nd street attorney moving party
i have no other hands chair
give me a second i don't like how i
these cases mixed up two o'clock oh I think I got it right now I think bear with me everyone
All right, anyone else requesting the continuance or withdrawal?
Seeing none, but I need to have an announcement to make. Just give me a second.
1925 North 4th Street is listed as number two on the 330 list today but it's actually to be heard
tomorrow at 3.30. So 1925 North 4th Street is being heard tomorrow at 3.30. It was listed today by mistake.
Frank, which one was that?
Number two on the on the 330 list.
I'm making an announcement now and I'll make it again at 330.
That Byberry rule?
Oh, you said 330, right?
Yeah, yeah.
330 is number two on the 330 list.
I announced it now just in case anyone was going to hang on.
But we'll announce it again at 330.
And let me make sure.
oh 52nd street
that's for 330. yeah i'm here i do have one more request could you call number seven just
to determine if anyone is here because i have no record of having received exhibits
which one was that sharon
i'm sorry number seven on the two o'clock list yes
What was your question again?
So she's asking if we can call that case to see if there's someone here, the applicant
or attorney, to present because we did not receive exhibits, so the idea is that it should
be continued.
okay thank you so mi-2020-001190 6778-84 ridge avenue is anyone here on this case
chair i have jeffrey yes that's me are you an attorney i am not i'm the potential leasee of
property um okay potentially what lisa there
A what?
Potentially what?
Lee C. They're building a new commercial building, and I'm going to be the Lee C in
that building.
According to staff, we have not received any documentation.
Really?
We have, because the Roxborough Development Corporation sent a, we have a copy of it,
and the Roxborough Community Association also has a document they sent.
i'm sorry could i just ask a question chair if it's allowed yes yes um so mr brass office yes
did you are you the applicant presenting i am not is there attorney for this case
they're supposed to be i'm surprised they're not here yet um can you give me do you know who they
are yes it's uh eric marshall is okay yes i see him please hold the line okay
okay cheers hi good afternoon eric marshall how are you good thank you
um sharon or tanya went away in my it's our understanding that we did not get full
list of documentation um i have an email trail from richard de marco who's our attorney he's
just having trouble logging in i'm texting with him now but i have the email trail he's submitted
all of the documentation as of last week and then we submitted an additional document from
the rdc one of the rcos of a letter of support too so we've sent over the letter of support and
all the addendums and attachments i mean i can re-forward that email i'm copied on that email
but i know he did send it i will email mr demarco now and he actually just said he he's in i don't
know if you if you see him raising his hand why don't we just call this in order and i will
contact rich now yeah okay all right sharon just to put on a record yes we received it but he may
not have sent it to you as required okay thank you all right thank you anyone else
no chair no other hands thank you with that i believe we can begin tanya
Yes, Chair. Okay, thank you. Confessor, please call the first case.
Meeting item MI 2020-001199, 1007 South 3rd Street.
Where are we at? Yeah, I don't have that. I have... That's number eight, Tanya, from the
two o'clock list. That was supposed to be number one. Remember you said there was number eight?
oh i'm sorry confessor that i had squashed that because it's eight on a two o'clock
okay so get rid of my apologies no problem um but i did i don't sharon did you
okay we can go forward to we do have exhibits for that and the attorney is jane sue
okay so we can begin with survivor 3107 survivor i believe so okay medium item
MI 2020-001-1206-3701, Survival Street.
Anyone here for Survival Street?
please raise your hand.
We have Brett Feldman, who's been promoted to a panelist and will wait to be sworn in.
Brett, you swear to affirm and tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Do you agree to waive the reading?
I apologize.
This is Sharon Saleta.
I keep getting disconnected, but I just wanted to, the next case we had on as number eight
on the two o'clock list, or number eight on the 930 list, but it's actually number one
for today.
So perhaps you could call that after Mr. Feldman's case.
It's 1007 South 3rd.
so after this case we'll call that one up yeah because I have it listed I have two page eights
that's one of them okay all right Mr. Feldman identify yourself and then I think confessor
you'll read off the rest of what you the instructions yes Mr. Chairman members of the
Yes, Mr. Chairman, members of the Board, Planning Commission, Brett Feldman, 1835 Market Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, 19103.
board planning commission
I represent the owner-applicant, Castro Lofts, LLC.
Do you agree to waive the reading of his refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Thank you.
Have you emailed an exhibit packet with the required documents, proof of ownership,
should prove of tax compliance, copy of the refusal of referral,
photos and plans, five days in advance of this area?
We have.
Thank you.
Have you met with the RCO and have a letter?
Yes, we have both a letter of support from the RCO.
We also now have a letter from the district councilperson,
Mr. Councilperson Squilla, in support slash non-opposition for this project.
Thank you.
You may proceed.
Thanks.
May I share my screen?
Yes, you may.
Let's see here.
It hasn't been shared yet, has it?
You got it now?
Okay, thank you.
So here is the cover sheet for the exhibit package.
you'll see exhibits one through 11 which I'd ask be incorporated into the record
we also have wasn't in this package but is now available the letter of support
you should see in front of you from the Harrogate Civic Association in front of
you 11 11 in support 11 votes I think to I think it's two or zero in
opposition. And then we also have a letter from the councilman, Mark Squilla, in support
non-opposition as well. Let me go back to the exhibit package. This is a little bit of a back
to the future project. The zoning board saw this back in 2014, this exact project, this exact
building, and approved it. Unfortunately, the applicant got stuck in the water department,
And by the time the water department approval was ready, then zoning said that the zoning permit, which we had got, was no longer good.
So this is, we are coming back to the zoning board for the exact approval that we previously got, that we ran out of time because we couldn't get through the water department, I believe in the streets department.
So this might look familiar to any of the board members who were there at that time.
So here's the project itself.
Here's the deed.
get right to it uh this is the building uh this is castor avenue here uh this is survivor street
here uh this is a uh rather large industrial building uh that has been vacant uh for some
time again with frontage on castor front around survivor and let me just take you through it
that's the that's the castor frontage um it's that's the inside um still very structurally strong
but clearly in need of redevelopment and just as we obtained back in 2014-15
what this application is seeking is a mixed-use building it is here's the
best way to look at this this is the building and this is actually a parking
field that we have that would be part of this we're looking again for 90
apartment units in the building and then 10 commercial spaces we have both
parking on site in this area over here and then this is kind of a unique
situation where the same owner has this parking over here and we actually have a
permit already for the non accessory parking of another 39 or 40 spaces that
we can provide for this building so it's really kind of a win-win and that
permit for the parking is in place in our exhibit package so this is the
building, this is Caster, this is Surviva, this is the Heintzman Rec Center that's over here,
which is really kind of a nice attraction for our future residents, which is right now being
prepared to be completely renovated under the city's rebuild program. I'll just take you down
take you down here the property zone CA2 so it's known like shopping center commercial which
here. The property is owned CA2, so it's owned like shopping center commercial.
um really um I mean we do have a we do have a commercial component of this but clearly it's
not your typical CA2 uh commercial shopping uh center so that's why I think you know there's
a hardship here um it's already been recognized by the zoning board but uh you know for CA2 here
It doesn't really fully make sense in that respect.
And then let me just take you through some of the rendering.
This is, you know, in a lot of ways, it's the same building.
It's, you know, we're going to add trees, obviously, new windows, new exterior finish.
But it's, you know, it's a heck of a building the way it is.
And we would just be cleaning it up.
And then, you know, tremendous reinvestment on the inside and with all new windows.
part of the discussions with the community was about creating a crosswalk across a caster which
is a busy street to link us to the park that's across the street and we've got commitments
already from the state senator and the council person to work with us to make sure that you
know these neighbors can then access the park and really kind of create a new a new little
neighborhood right there with the park this is a refusal letter again it's you
know there's no other refusal of them CA to underlying zoning you'll see at the
bottom here again is that prior approval for the exact same project and then I'll
just walk you through real quick you know the zoning plan right here you know
there's again there's no changes to the building other than other than you know
keeping it the way it is in that case you can summarize it would be helpful yeah yeah there's
no substantive to changes correct everything's basic no there's no substantive changes it's it's
it's a it's a straight rehab project um again but we've got the the parking across the street
for 40 spaces plus the five on site so we have 45 spaces for 90 uh it's just it's you know really a
win-win, I think in all respects. Community was supportive back in 14-15. They were very
supportive still. We tried to get this back in front of the board on an administrative approval
and actually the councilman supported on this. And then Ellen and I wouldn't let this get back
on administrative approval because they said we were out of time. So I wish we could have avoided
this whole delay that we've had, but in any event, here we are. And with that, I can ask
the property owner, Mr. Alon, who I believe is on the call to adopt my testimony, unless
the board has any other questions for myself, the owner, or our project architect, Ray Rolla,
who has done many projects that have been in front of this board as well.
Get your witness, the owner of the property.
Yes, Mr. Alon, are you on the line?
Can you unmute Mr. Alon
A-L-O-N
Hi Mr. Alon
Please spell your name
First and last name
Okay my first name is E-L-I-A-H-U
Last name is A-L-O-N
And you swear and affirm
To tell the truth
The whole truth
Nothing but the truth
Thank you Mr. Feldman
Sure. Mr. Lahn, you are the member of Castor Lofts LLC, the owner of the property, correct?
Yes. And you've heard my testimony concerning this project?
And you've heard me explain why the 90 apartments with the 10 commercial space, in your opinion, makes the most sense for the redevelopment of this property?
And this is the project that the board previously approved and that you were the applicant for back in 2014-15?
And do you adopt my, do you, was my testimony true and accurate to the best of your knowledge?
And do you adopt it as your own?
Thank you.
Thank you.
Any questions from the board?
Anyone else wish to testify in this case? If so, please raise your hand.
No hands, Chair.
Thank you. Planning Commission?
Good afternoon.
M-I-A-N, please spell your full name for the record.
M-I-A-N, Litwin, L-I-T-W-I-N.
Planning Commission, do you swear and affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth,
and nothing but the truth yes i do thank you please proceed uh this parcel uh is sorry hold on
This parcel is owned CA2 under the assumption that this property would be demolished and converted to auto-oriented retail.
However, the Planning Commission supports the adaptive reuse of this building over demolition and redevelopment.
Therefore, we are not opposed to granting the variance.
Thank you.
MI-2020-0012063701 Sapiva Street. My vote is yes.
My vote is yes.
my vote is yes my vote is yes thank you as always for your time and
consideration have a good day meeting item MI 2020-001199-1007 South
third street no one has come forward for this case all right
confessor for some reason i don't have that page would you read that um i'm sorry chair um i do
have uh it was here hank clinton i think was here oh here we go yes hank is the lawyer for this one
okay okay
good afternoon emory you swear and affirm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth
Do you agree to waive the reading of its refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
And have you emailed an exhibit packet with the required documents, proof of ownership,
proof of tax compliance, copy of the refusal or referral, photos and plans,
five days in advance of this hearing?
Yes, I have, Mr. Plaza.
And have you met with the RCO and have a letter?
Yes, I do.
Thank you.
Please identify yourself for the record.
Sure. Good afternoon, members of the Board and Planning Commission. My name is Henry Clinton.
I'm here for the applicant, Noven Pan Real Estate, concerning 1007 South 3rd Street.
Ms. Sunkit, can I share my screen?
Yes, you may, Mr. Clinton.
Thank you. Can you see my screen?
Not yet.
now we got you you're good yes okay thank you uh so this is my presentation binder
with the calendar number in today's date table of contents including all the
exhibits that I have for this presentation. Exhibits A1 through A11, my appearance statement,
the deed, and I'll run through this.
There's a zoning notice that I gave to the community for the community meeting,
which is Queen Village, as well as for the ZBA hearing date today.
These are my mailings, certificate of mailing, indicating that we've mailed out 102 pieces of mail concerning the RCO meeting, as well as today's meeting, tax certification, notice of refusal.
The refusal concerns really two issues.
One is the proposal is for a three-family dwelling in an RSA 5 zone, and we're proposing
two parking spots in the rear of the building off of Bodine Street.
All right, so this is the zoning map showing the property.
property is right in here it's right adjacent to an rm1 zoning district and when i get further
along showing you the plans you'll see that all the homes to the north of the property as well
as behind the not all but behind the property there's there are several multi-family dwellings
so this is really a multi-family block uh we did meet with queen village here is our letter of
support. They asked us to make a couple changes. One was to
provide them with a plan showing the sight lines of what the
property would look like when you're standing across the
look like when you're standing across the street in terms of whether you would see the pilot house or not.
street in terms of whether you would see the pilot house
They also asked us to make some changes and upgrade the facade material,
which Rustin Ower and Harmon DeWitch Ower did, and you'll see that in their plans. So based on the changes to the plans
that we provided to Ms. Saleta prior,
we obtained the letter of support from Queen Village. And with me on the line is
is Noam Pan, the principal of the applicant, as well as Rustin Orr, who may testify if the board
is so inclined. So here, just again, right now, this is a vacant lot. To the right is a quadplex,
and to the left is a triplex. Here's a larger version of the site plan, excuse me, the zoning
map, indicating that the RM1 zone is to the south, and the RSA5 zone is to the north.
To the right, you can see an outline of the project.
It's a rather large lot, as all the lots are on the street.
And this is a significant exhibit here.
The proposed project is right here on 3rd Street, 10-under block.
Carpenter Street here is Bodine Street is here.
It's a street that you can drive down.
We're proposing two parking spots in the rear, similar to the homes on the south end.
And these homes are, as I said, quadplexes, four-family dwellings.
We're proposing three-family.
There's a three-family adjacent, another three-family, and then a single-family on the corner,
but directly almost behind and a little bit to the north is another multifamily property.
These are the sight lines that we provided to Queen Village,
indicating when you're standing across the street, you cannot see the pilot house.
these are the floor plans basement of first floor would be one unit the second unit would be the
second third and fourth floor with access to rooftop deck and the other unit would be again
duplication on the second third and fourth floor with a rooftop deck these are the elevations
both front and rear and what we added on the front was bigger windows and also
some balcony Juliet balcony on the front just to set off the front and give it
some more detail these are the proviso plans as we did make changes on the
plans we provided them to miss a letter before the hearing this is an aerial view i guess i can make
this bigger for you i guess it's it's just made that bigger for a full screen so this is an aerial
view again this is third tree it's north and south this is a current vacant lot these are
photographs taken within 30 days that I took. Again, the vacant lot. These are three new
quadplexes to the south, and these are the adjacent two properties to the north,
which is a triplex and a triplex. And just want to see, is my client, Mr. Penn, are you on the line?
Or Ms. Sunkit, can you unmute him?
um i don't have that name i have a gnome yes
gnome can you hear me yes i can hear you i do japan would you please spell your first and last
name yes it's noam n-o-a-m and last name is aviv a-v-i-v we're in the firm to tell the truth
the whole truth and nothing but the truth yes i do uh mr v this is henry clinton again and you
are the principal uh in the applicant the llc yes and you had the opportunity to listen to my
testimony as i made this presentation to the zoning board yes if you had the opportunity to
testify would you adopt my testimony as your own and as true and correct yes i will thank you very
much. With that, I ask that my exhibits be introduced into evidence and that the board
look kindly upon this application. These are de minimis, dimensional variances that we're asking
for in terms of the parking in the rear. We have some unique circumstances that this property is
situated among and between several multifamily residences. We're not really altering the essential
character of the neighborhood and it's in harmony with the code as well as with
what the neighborhood group Queen Village has requested and with that at rest. Thank you.
Queen Village has requested and we're not at rest. Thank you. Questions from the board? No.
Anyone else wish to testify in this case? If so, please raise your hand.
Chair, we have a Robert Pendergrass. You can unmute yourself and wait to be sworn in.
please spell your name
first name is Robert
sure first name is Robert
R-O-B-E-R-T
last name Pendergrass
P-E-N-D-E-R-G-R-A-S-S
I live at and own
218 Carpenter Street
Philadelphia
BA19147
we're in a firm to tell the truth
the whole truth and nothing but the truth
please proceed
yes so as I said
I live and own with my wife 218 Carpenter Street, which is a single-family home. It
also borders Bodine Street, which borders the property in question and will be their access
to the parking. So as such, I'm going to be directly affected, or our property at least,
will be directly affected by the decision made today. I'm not in support of this variance because
I feel like that this neighborhood has too much multi-family housing already going in.
I don't feel that it is needed.
Just going, you know, just talking about Third Street on its own from Washington up two blocks
to Christian, we have multiple empty homes.
We have several currently occupied homes that are currently for sale.
we have the aforementioned development next door which is 12 units that are for sale and
constructed and an empty lot that was I believe there's plans to make that multifamily as well
and there's another empty lot up on Montrose and third which has an upcoming hearing to get a
variance very similarly to turn it into multifamily homes. I think this will exacerbate parking
issues and generally just flood the market with all these multi-family smaller dwellings uh that
are not needed thank you uh do you have off street parking correct yes how many how many spaces
i don't personally have any spaces i mean i just no i'm asking mr clinton i'm sorry
oh sorry we have two off-street parking spaces all right thank you anyone else
wish to testify in this case please raise your hand
that's it chair any commission
planning commission
Good afternoon, Chairman and members of the Board. Ian Litwin with Planning Commission staff.
All of this parcel is zoned RSA 5 is directly next to parcel zoned RM1. This proposal is similar
in scale to the three properties of new construction to the south. Since this project
is in the Queen Village neighborhood conservation overlay, it will be subject to Planning Commission
designing view at the time of building permit. Accordingly, we have no opposition to granting
advance. Thank you. MI-2020-001199 1007 South 3rd. My vote is yes with proviso maximum two units.
Yes with proviso. Yes with proviso. Yes with proviso. There was also a revised plans proviso.
Vice, plan, one page?
One page.
Approved today. Thank you.
Mr. Chairman, this is Henry Clinton.
Did you say the proposal is for three units?
Action, two units.
Understood.
Thank you.
Meeting item MI-2020-000593-3114, Byberry Road.
good morning good afternoon excuse me good afternoon mr demarco uh you
good afternoon good afternoon mr de marco uh you you agree to waive the reading of his refusal and
stipulate to his accuracy yes i do okay he's on the road from earlier uh have you emailed
an exhibit packet within the with the required documents proof of ownership proof of tax
compliance copy of the refusal or referral photos and plans five days in advance of this hearing yes
Also, have you met with the RCO and have a letter?
We do.
We have a letter from the council and Brian O'Neill as well.
Thank you.
Please identify yourself for the record.
Good afternoon, everyone.
Richard DeMarco.
I'm here on behalf of Yuan Sheng Construction.
My client, Michelle Huang, is available, and I'll ask her to speak in a minute.
There is a little bit of history on this one, so I do want to go through just very briefly a few things.
what what happened is uh the application was filed uh prior to my representation of of this client
uh i recommended a change to the way they phrased the application it was a multi-family application
without subdivision i realized that it was their intention to subdivide and sell
the units fee simple so we did a revised application we also had very serious concerns
from the councilman's office and from the rco at the meetings at the end of last year
so i asked for an amended refusal this board was kind enough to present a letter
and i'll start sharing my screen so you can see all of that uh desktop
Give me a moment, sorry.
Here we go.
So I did put the original refusal in just for illustration purposes.
That's it right there.
We changed our proposal significantly.
We also reduced the density.
we went from six proposed units to five let me show you the amended refusal and your board's
letter that's the old refusal this is the letter from your board from last year allowing the
amended refusal because we were going to subdivide instead of presenting it as multi-family
and then this is the amended refusal so we have a we have a permitted use single family
single-family lots but we have dimensional refusals for a lot area a lot with semi-detached
and I think that's it open area so what's curious about this property is the property
this is the old house it was a mansion style property with a pool none of this was usable
my clients will testify this was a very large lot very out of character with the neighborhood
here are attached dwellings with front pad parking across the street from our lots
are front loaded garage pad parking and attached dwellings but to here to the left of our lot
are fully detached three properties with fully detached but when i get to the rest of this
you'll see that we sit on the boundary between the fully attached pad site parking and we are
the lone lot that is this large we are a unique property and again this mansion property when i
show you the photos it was an extremely poor condition it was unusable and unsellable in that
condition it needed a lot of work it was vacant for a certain period of time prior to my client's
involvement now let me make let me address this right away this was the request of the councilman
that we have larger more open lots on the ends uh we wanted to be deferential to the district
councilman we want to avoid any potential appeals so that is why we put larger lots on the ends
just so you know that didn't come out of nowhere we we wanted to work with the district council
person here is the current proposal fee simple lots larger lots on the ends lots of open space
in the rear a lot of these neighbors wanted us to maintain some significant rear yards
we met this their concerns and i would say this is why we have
We met their concerns, and I would say this is why we have approval from the RCO and the
councilman.
The councilman wanted more brick facades.
Our facades are brick, and we met that request as well.
I just want to show you, and then I submitted the revised plan form only because I wasn't
sure we had changed the application.
I certainly agree, Sharon, and I spoke about this application.
She said we do not need stamps and a revised plan form
because the amended refusal reflects the plan.
And that's the amended refusal.
Again, let me just show you the overhead so you can see what I mean about.
This is our meeting notice for the in-person meeting that we held last year.
We were able to get support from them.
i'll show that in a minute that's the old refusal
sorry these are our notices there's the rco letter there was a little bit of opposition
but the vote was overall in favor of our proposal as revised by the way
oh and we did ask the rco to update their support we did get that we got it a little
bit after the five days but they were sent to the board i'll show you those in a minute
we did get updated letters from the councilman and this is the updated letter from the rco
based on the new refusal
from mike doyle that's the old property that was in poor condition i'll show you the photos you can
see this is the interior of the property when it was bought very poor condition uh you can see
Neither was, I don't want to use the term hoarding.
I don't know if that's politically correct.
You get my point.
Very poor condition.
Okay, so let me see.
It was really bad.
The walls were in poor condition.
The walls had to be ripped out.
Okay, you get my point.
Let me just show you the overhead.
These are the attached dwellings to our left.
This is our current property here.
These are the structures.
Could you rotate those, Rich?
I'll try.
Mr. Chairman, I am not sure how to do this.
I apologize.
All right.
No problem.
But this is across the street. They're attached front pad parking. This is our property here.
These are the three detached dwellings that are unique to the property that are to our left.
So there are other smaller lots that are fully detached, but you can see all back here, it's all
All attached front pad parking. And the overhead will show this. That's our updated tax cert, our deed. Bear with me. This doesn't show the lot. I was hoping those would show the lot sizes. They don't. But you can see it here.
all this is the area all attached front pad parking this is the photographs across the street
here's our property here we're very large this is our the only lot that was this size
these are the i'm sorry there's more than three there looks like it's five
five detached dwellings everything else is consistent with our current proposal
attached dwellings in fact we are far larger and less dense than these
here's the overhead i wanted to show you our property is here and luckily i don't have to
rotate this there's across the street here's the attached dwellings to our left which are similar
and again i say mr chairman our proposal is larger and deeper larger lots less dense than
these across the street that's the old property okay
same here this is us here this is all behind us some semi-detached but mostly attached front pad
parking all right you can see our our our lot's unusual okay and so i'm going to see if i have
michelle on board with us today michelle are you there can you michelle huang is on tanya if you
can find her and authorize her? She can unmute and wait to be sworn in. Thank you.
she can unmute and wait to be sworn in thank you very much good afternoon this is michelle huang
hi michelle would you please spell your first and last name for the record
yes my first name is m-i-c-h-e-l-l-e my last name is h-u-a-n-g
you swear and affirm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth
Yes, I do.
Thank you.
Mr. DeMarco.
Michelle, were you able to hear all of my factual statements and testimony on this Zoom hearing?
Great.
Do you adopt it as your own factual testimony and agree with that it is true and accurate?
And do you agree that the existing property on the lot was unique to the other lots in the area?
And do you agree that the property, as when you purchased it, was unusable and dilapidated
and had all sorts of structural and aesthetic problems in the interior?
Were you able to sell that property as is?
You responded to complaints, not complaints, but you responded to concerns from the neighbors
and you redrew your plan to meet those concerns, right?
And the brick fronts and the large lots on the ends were the request of Councilman Brian O'Neill.
You were willing to meet his request, correct?
Mr. Chairman, let me show you the Councilman's letter.
We did get that.
That would be, I believe, this one.
Has no objection to the granting of the variance.
all right any questions from that's it yeah that's it thank you questions from the board
no no anyone else wish to testify in this case if so please raise your hand
no hands at this time thank you tanya planning commission
good afternoon chairman members of the board
Ian Litwin, Planning Commission staff.
Although zoned for single-family development,
this proposal is similar in scale to the overwhelming majority
of the surrounding development in the area.
Accordingly, we have no opposition to granting the variances.
Thank you.
Thank you.
M-I-2020-000593-3114 by Berry Road.
My vote is yes.
My vote is yes.
My vote is yes.
My vote is yes.
thank you for your time everyone okay medium item MI 2020-001-207-1618
Germantown Avenue and the attorney is Henry Clinton yes
Mr. Clinton, you still under oath. Do you agree to waive the reading of its refusal
and stipulate to its accuracy?
Have you emailed an exhibit packet with the required documents, proof of ownership,
proof of tax compliance, copies of refusal or referral, photos and plans five days in advance of this hearing?
I have, Mr. Plaza.
Also, have you met with the RCO and have a letter?
Thank you. Please identify yourself for the record.
I'm Henry Clinton. I'm here for the applicant, 16-18-20, Germantown LLC. And Ms. Sunkit,
can I share my screen? I'll start the presentation.
Yes, Mr. Clinton.
can you see my screen not yet not yet
got it got it thank you um good afternoon mr chairman members of the board of planning
commission henry clinton for the applicant uh 16 18 20 germantown avenue these are two
lots that are going to be subdivided they both are on 1d so we're going to have 16 18 and 16 20
germantown avenue 16 18 is partial a 16 20 is partial b this is my presentation binder
evidence binder containing exhibits AA through A19, appearance statement, the deed indicating
the deed indicating ownership zoning notice to both the community group as well as to
ownership, zoning
every neighbor on the list that the planning commission gave us which comprised approximately
100 and excuse me 79 individual addresses here's our tax certification notice of refusal refusal
has to do with mainly the size of the lots and i'll explain why the size of these lots are
somewhat smaller than the other lots that my client already built on germantown avenue
because as germantown avenue goes north and west it narrows making all the lots closer to the corner
smaller than the existing lots on the block but i'll show you that with a with a photograph and
the zoning map. Here's our application and here's the zoning map. So we're in an RM1 zoning district
which permits multifamily. Our request is for a duplex at 1618 and a duplex at 1620. My client
has already developed and has had approved and is in the process of constructing the homes that
are along here. Some of them are triplexes because the lots are deeper. Some of them are duplexes.
And the reason these two lots were not included within this development was at the time there
were title issues that my client had to iron out and square away before he was able to become the
owner. So Old Kensington Neighbors Association did not have a letter in place by the time I
submitted my package but has since forwarded that letter uh to the zoning board and we've forwarded
it to Ms. Saleta. It's a letter of uh of support. I think Ms. Saleta will attest to that.
My witness. We did receive that and thank you. Thank you Ms. Saleta. The witnesses that are on
the line or on the meeting are Nate Thorman and Greg Stanevan, the architect with KJO
Architecture. So basically from here down is under construction and already
approved for, again, some are triplexes, some are duplexes. The issue before the community
group was we originally proposed a four-story structure here and a four-story structure
here to make the two units more spacious. There was a lot of give and take and some
pushback by the RCO as well as to the adjacent neighbor. And my client, after numerous conversations
and myself with both the RCO and the neighbor, agreed to remove the fourth floor and basically
to make the duplexes here match up with what remains on the block. So we have continuity
and a pretty nice landscape, excuse me,
viewscape along and streetscape along Germantown Avenue.
See if I can make this a little bit bigger.
So this gives you a little more perspective of Germantown Avenue.
What I was saying in the beginning is Germantown Avenue moves north and west
and this street remains parallel.
the lots as you get further down get narrower and narrower. Now this is an older Google photograph
because from here from the corner actually down to here has already been developed and been
approved. We're talking about the two lots that come at the end of this tail.
We do have a proviso plan submitted to Mr. Letta and it's also in this package indicating that we
adjusted the location of the pilot house we moved it forward so it's not on the
back wall and we removed the fourth floor the floor plans are pretty
straightforward the first unit basement and first floor the second unit would be
the second floor and the third floor and then the second and third floor have a
rooftop deck. I can go through the floor plans in more detail if the chair so
desires. Only if the board would like to see more. No. Thank you. You can proceed Mr.
Thank you. You can proceed, Mr. Clinton.
Clint.
Mr. Dorman, are you on the line?
Mr. Dorman, are you on the Zoom call?
He's been unmuted.
Yes, I'm on the line.
Mr. Dorman, please give us your first and last name, spell them, please.
My first name is Metabol, N-A-T-A-N-E-L.
My last name is Dharmon, D-A-L-M-O-N.
Do you swear and affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Thank you. Mr. Clinton?
Mr. Dharmon, this is Mr. Clinton.
Were you on the meeting, or involved in the meeting, where you heard my presentation?
If you had the opportunity to testify, would you adopt my testimony as your own?
And was my testimony true and correct?
Thank you, Mr. Dorman.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Because this is a unique situation where the lots shrink as we move further along Germantown Avenue,
and the construction of these two duplexes is in line, continuous with the existing structures on Germantown Avenue,
we are not altering the essential character of the neighborhood.
this unique circumstance hopefully warrants the granny of the variances. We're in harmony with
the code and in particular neighborhood group having made some concessions to make sure that
we're constructing what's compatible with the neighborhood wishes. And with that, I rest and
ask that my exhibits be admitted into the record. This is Sharon Saleta. I'm not sure if Mr. Clinton
mention this we did receive the letter from the rco we also received a letter of non-opposition
from councilwoman sanchez thank you and uh did i hear correctly is your revised one page
was your revised plan yes one page yes thank you questions from the board no
no planning commission good afternoon chairman members of the board ian litwin planning commission
staff this parcel is zoned for multifamily residential and the proposal is similar to
other new development on the corridor due to the size of the lots we have no opposition to
planting advances. Thank you. MI-2020-001207 16, let me start again, 1618-1620 Germantown Avenue.
My vote is yes with the proviso revised plan one page approved today. Yes with proviso. Yes with proviso.
Yes with proviso. Thank you very much.
Okay medium item MI 2020-001-189-2019-25 East Montgomery Avenue.
hi good afternoon jane sue for the city of philadelphia and for the applicant
can you hold one moment so i can promote her to a panelist sure thanks
so i have jane and then leonard reuter both can unmute yourselves and wait to be sworn in
and please spell your last name last name sue s-e-u you are with uh the city of philadelphia
we're in the firm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth
Please proceed.
Ms. James, have you emailed an exhibit packet with the required documents,
proof of ownership, proof of tax compliance, copy of the refusal or referral,
photos and plans five days in advance of this hearing?
I have.
Have you met with the RCO and have a letter?
Thank you.
Please proceed.
May I share my screen?
Yes, please.
it's not there yet but all right try and take you
Okay, looks like I'm having some...
um trouble here not sure
Mr. Reuter going to join you in uh on behalf of the city
uh yes if if needed um I can I can uh yeah an overview of the projects
sorry I just do that I think this will be very simple so you can summarize okay sorry about that
Yeah, so the parcel is at 121925 East Montgomery Ave, the intersection of Montgomery Ave and Moyer Street.
This is the Fishtown Rec Center, the Fishtown Pool that had sort of been out of use for several years
and under the Project Rebuild initiative is undergoing renovation to bring the pool back to the neighborhood.
So with that, I do have two witnesses, Tarasheed from Project Rebuild and the architect, Joseph
Powell.
Basically, what we're here is that through the renovation, the existing accessory structures
that were the bathrooms were demolished, and the fencing will also be replaced.
um and so um i can go ahead um and have joseph powell kind of give you an overview of projects
um if he has better success i think he has a copy of the plans um as well to share if he can be
unmuted i don't think we're going to need any in-depth testimony at least that's my feeling
unless there's someone out there who is in opposition to this.
Other than that, I think we just can get the names of the folks
who are part of your team on the record.
So they have to raise their hand for me to recognize them.
Yeah, please raise your hand.
We'll just get your names and your titles on the record.
And if you have anything really important to add, please do so.
Tara Rasheed has been unmuted.
She needs to be sworn in.
Good afternoon, Ms. Rasheed.
Please spell your first and last name.
Hello.
Thanks for having me.
My name is Tara Rasheed.
First name, T-A-R-A.
Last name, R-A-S-H-E-E-D.
And you are with?
I'm a project manager with Rebuild.
We're in firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth.
we also have a josh a joseph powell joseph you've been unmuted wait to be sworn in
hello joseph powell hi mr powell please spell your last name sure first name is joseph j-o-s-e-p-h
Last name Powell, P-O-W-E-L-L.
You are with?
Principal of Buell Kretzer Powell,
Architects in Philadelphia.
Anyone else?
And Mr. Powell and Ms. Rashid,
if you have anything to add
that you need to add to the testimony here,
please do so.
If not, we'll incorporate your names
and your titles into the record.
i have nothing additional um we did get support from the local rco for to move ahead with the work
and i as well have nothing additional thank you and chair just to confirm we did get get a letter
from fishtown neighborhood association i see leonard's still there i don't know if leonard
needs to get on or not um hi this is leonard reuter yeah i'm mostly it was just observing
this is a ms sue's case so you know again it's just a weird situation where it's an existing
swimming pool that's being upgraded and because of the technicality we had to it's treated as a
new application uh just to expand a portion of it and that ran into a refusal so that's really the
only reason we're here but jane okay i'm sorry chair for purposes of the record can we swear
him in thank you i know he kept he kept going all right leonard full name please spell your last name
Full name, please. Spell your last name.
sure thank you leonard reuter l-e-l-n-a-r
Sure. Thank you. Leonard Reuter, L-E-L-N-A-R-D.
Last name is R-E-U-T-E-R.
Who are with?
City of Philadelphia.
All right. Thank you.
And I swear and affirm that I told the truth.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Okay. I think everyone, is there anyone else, Jane?
No, that's all for our team.
All right. Any questions from the board?
no anyone else wish to testify in this case if so please raise your hand
no hands at this time chair thank you planning commission
good afternoon chairman members of the board uh this proposal from the city is to upgrade
the neighborhood's pool as part of the administration's rebuild initiative
therefore we strongly support granting advance for this public improvement project
For the purpose of the record, that was Ian Litwin, L-I-T-W-I-N.
Thank you.
All right.
You can read by mine.
I try.
I try.
MI-2020-001189, 1219-25 East Montgomery Avenue, my vote is yes.
My vote is yes.
My vote is yes.
My vote is yes.
Thank you.
Okay, meeting item MI-2020-000826-6301 North Broad Street.
If you're here for Broad Street, please raise your hand.
I see Dawn Tancredi. I see her listed as the attorney.
Dawn, you've been promoted to the panelists. You can open your mic and wait to be sworn in.
Ms. Tancredi, you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
yes don't please spell your name for the record sure it's dawn tancredi t-a-n-c-r-e-d-i
the address is 2005 market street philadelphia 19103 and don have you email an exhibit packet
with an with the required documents proof of ownership proof of tax compliance copy of the
refusal or referral photos and plans five days in advance of this year we did submit the package
as for tax clearance i do represent the equitable owner of the property and a redacted agreement of
sale is enclosed have you met with the rco and have a letter we did meet with the rco we were
able to reach an agreement with the rco we don't have a letter in hand but i believe that miss
Sharon Wilson is available here today, and there may even be other representatives of the RCO to
speak on their behalf. Thank you. You may proceed. So thank you. As I mentioned, I'm here on behalf
of Bright Partners, the equitable owner, an applicant of 6301 North Broad Street here today.
The board did grant a brief continuance of this matter to allow us to continue to meet with OLCA,
and we were able to reach an agreement with them, and we do have their support for this project.
With that being said, there may be other people that are present here today
that are not supporting this project, so I would like to go through the entire case.
Okay, so with me here today is Carl Wright, principal of Wright Partners, Bill Browntree,
the director of development for Wright Partners. Marissa Price, who is also with Wright Partners,
and she will serve as the property manager and point of contact for the Oak Lane Community
Action Association. Greg Newell is the engineer with Nave Newell, who prepared the plans,
and Marshall Cook, a general manager of AutoZone, is also here.
I would ask that the packet that we submitted be incorporated into the record,
along with the additional memo and exhibit submitted here today.
Ms. Sunkit, I would ask that you please share the screen of my associate, Greg Heleniak.
He has some renderings and plans to show.
Can you raise your hand? Okay.
He's been promoted to a panelist.
he's been promoted to a panelist he can now share his screen
He can now share his screen.
Thank you.
I wait to be sworn in.
Greg, you can open your mic so you can be sworn in.
hi this is gregory heleniak of zarwin bomb 2005 market street my name is spelled g-r-e-g-o-r-y
last name h-e-l-e-n-i-a-k learn from to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth
i do thank you please proceed okay so what we have here today um oh excuse me as for the accuracy
of the refusal. We can waive the reading of that refusal. However, there is a typo.
The proposed and the required footage for the side yard depth is reversed. Each column is
reversed. So it's a typo. So what we have here today is a plan to revitalize the corner of Broad
Street and Madari Avenue. Currently, the property consists of a one-story dilapidated structure
defaced with graffiti and a parking lot that is filled with non-working damaged vehicles,
old tires, and weeds. It's essentially a junkyard. The property is situated on North Broad Street,
which is a PennDOT regulated state highway consisting of multiple lanes of
traffic in both directions north and south. The site is surrounded by an
abundance of auto related uses including gas stations, used car lots, auto repair
car garages, collision shops, car washes, and tire shops.
The history of this property shows that it's been used for auto-related uses since the
inception of the zoning code in 1933.
At that time, the property was used for a gas station.
Over the years, the property was used for new car sales.
in 2005 the zoning board approved the very same use that we are here for today sales of auto parts
and that was for an advanced auto parts at the time so the proposal here is to clear the site
completely and make improvements to the site and its surroundings a beautiful new masonry building
will be constructed for a thriving auto zone business and before i ask the engineer who
prepared the plans to go into details about the plans i'll provide some of the highlights of this
project the plan includes construction of a stormwater management system we are adding
street trees and landscaping we're adding security cameras and lighting we are addressing
environmental issues on the site. We are restricting access after hours. We are replacing
all of the public sidewalks within the property boundary. We are eliminating three curb cuts,
which adds parking to the street. One of the curb cuts being eliminated is on Broad Street,
and two curb cuts being eliminated are on Madari.
we are adding 16 to 20 full and part-time jobs and on that note autozone's model is community
focused most notably autozone is a successful and growing company with a commitment to hiring
local residents autozone entry level employees have been promoted to the highest levels of the
organization. We will be replacing the fence on Broad Street with a decorative black fence.
Marissa Price from Wright and Partners will serve as a point of contact for OLCA.
We are modifying store hours so that this business would close at 8 30 pm every day.
We have agreed to turn off the Mederi facing sign at 8.30 each night.
We've agreed to turn off parking lot lights at 8.30 as well.
My client and AutoZone have reiterated their commitment throughout this process
to keep the parking lot clean, the sidewalk clean, and to secure this site for the neighborhood.
They've agreed to place signage both inside and outside of the building, prohibiting repairs
They've agreed to place signage both inside and outside of the building.
in the parking lot and the surrounding area.
And my client continues to agree to work with the city and neighbors on solutions to these
ongoing concerns.
And with that, I would ask Greg Newell, the engineer, to introduce himself.
And Ms. Tanya, would you allow Greg Newell to share his screen, please?
Okay, Greg has been promoted to panelists.
He can share his screen and unmute his mic and wait to be sworn in.
Thank you.
Newell, would you please spell your first and last name?
Greg, you have to unmute yourself.
Greg Newell.
Try that again.
Sorry, I thought I had that.
There we go.
Let's get the video as well.
Sorry.
Gregory, first and last name.
Gregory, G-R-E-G-O-R-Y, Newell, N-E-W-E-L-L.
you are you're here you're interested in this application i'm the uh civil engineering
consultant and land planning consultant for the project thank you and you swear to the firm to
tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth i do thank you please proceed ms team
thank you and greg can you put your address on the record sure it's 900 west valley road wayne pa
Thank you. And you've described your role with this project. Can you briefly discuss
your experience as an engineer? Sure. I've been added a little older than I'd like to admit,
but I've been added as a civil engineer since 1983. I'm a licensed professional engineer and
have been since 1985 or 6. I believe I've probably appeared as an expert witness in
some are approaching 500 different zoning hearing and different testimonies of that matter through
the years. And were you involved in preparing the plans for 6301 North Broad Street? Yes, I was.
Okay. And is an auto-related retail sales the only viable option at this property?
Yes, it is. And can you describe for the board and for everyone the reasons for that?
And what you did to, what you took into account for your analysis.
So take, when we started, we start right from the beginning and look in the site,
and the site geometry frequently plays a key role in what happens on a site.
This particular lot is fairly small for a commercial lot, 120 feet by 160 feet.
So we work with AutoZone and their prototypes to fit a layout that works for them.
recognizing that there is a use variance here we took into account and looked at what other uses
are permitted here and what would be the challenges of going on and it's key to remember in this that
in our discussions with the neighborhood community that we couldn't have access onto midair at this
point and we've agreed to eliminate that access so that really restricts how you use the property
and how you maneuver inside right excuse me on that note can you pull up the plan and show
everyone the plan that you're referring to um do i have that or does greg heleniak um let me see
where am i right from my office can share it i'll share my screen again
so the plan here shows a building that's facing uh midairi street with a single access add-on
to broad street as was discussed we've closed uh the other entrance on broad street which was
further north and closed both entrances onto the dairy it was very clear in talking to the
community that they did not want access out on the dairy for a variety of reasons especially
the idea of a commercial use turning down into the neighborhood so that quickly restricts the
options for what can go on this site and how it's used uh examples of things that might be
available on this site would be a building supply store and excuse me
Greg when you say available you mean permitted under the zoning code yes I'm
sorry what's permitted on the zoning code an example of building supply store as a
As a practical matter, that's typically building materials that are delivered on tractor-trailers.
practical matter that that's typically materials building materials that are
delivered on tractor trails
A typical tractor-trailer delivery type arrangement would need roughly 130 feet to maneuver to get around,
and they would have to be doing that on an almost daily basis to bring those supplies in.
This lot's, candidly, way too small for that type of use.
You have other uses that are permitted.
An example would be a convenience store type thing where food and grocery type things could be bought, sandwiches and so forth.
The traditional stores for that area require a much more larger parking arrangement to accommodate those uses.
The other thing is they're getting deliveries all day long.
And so they need a site where it's easy for them to park, to unload and to access.
and this site at a small dimension just doesn't allow that room to do that.
Other uses that are permitted that, again, would struggle is a pharmacy.
So that's a printed use on this site.
The problem is, and it's really accentuated now with the whole quarantines
and restrictions and COVID-type stuff in that people want to be able to drive up
to the pharmacy due to a drive-up window.
It's good for both reasons.
The people who are sick don't want to get out of their vehicle,
and the people who are healthy don't want them in the building, candidly.
There's just no way to fit a seven-to-nine car stacking lane
to accommodate a drive-through window,
especially when we only have single access.
You can see here those buildings are usually significantly larger
than what's proposed here.
So that makes it really hard.
That's the same thing like a use, like a Starbucks type of deal.
a coffee shop at Dunkin Donuts you need to be able to have a drive aisle and this lot is just
too small to allow that drive up window again customers today are looking for the ability to
maybe minimize their interaction socially where they don't have to and so that use is a struggle
another use it's permitted it's really a challenge would be a daycare in that particular case
It would be fair to have a drop-off area, a safe drop-off area coming in rather than being on the street
and then allowing them to walk in.
Can you get into the property?
Because we don't have an access out on the dairy, we can't loop around that,
and we really don't want to be stacking up traffic down on the dairy type of deal.
And then where would I put the building and the play area?
So we just kept going for all the various uses, and logistically, the size of the lot
and the limited accessibility options made it very difficult to find a way
that was a successful use on the property.
Thank you and can you describe the plans and the fencing
around the property? Sure, so um as seen on the screen there's a
building facing the dairy the building butts up against the
property line along Broad Street and towards the rear there on the north side
of the setback there the five yard setback from back there we have 17
parking spaces as shown and it's just a double row kind of your traditional
arrangement here we do have turnaround areas so people could back out in those
last spaces and turn around and get back out effectively so people coming in
customers coming in can maneuver and accommodate that arrangement. What we provide is, I talked
about the single access to add on the Broad Street, that will have a gate at night, and there's
actually a fence that ties from the building. It goes down along Broad Street, makes the turn on
the Mederi. A key item to point out is in our conversations with the residents, they really
like that fence along Mederi, and they asked us to keep that, and the applicant has agreed to keep
that fence in place so that'll remain there's also a retaining wall along the eastern property line
with a fence above that and the applicant has agreed to maintain that fence as well
we are upgrading and providing sidewalks along both frontages as you see
an important item to note is really dramatic as the pictures as greg had shown earlier the
pictures of the site it's a dramatic improvement on the aesthetics by the
landscaping that will provide and we're doing that in several different ways
there's straight trees along Broad Street that either we're keeping one or
upgrading and along the same thing would you be seeing down along the dairy so
you have street trees there then adding to the impact to really help the screen
the and minimize any impacts and residents along the dairy we provide on
the other side of the fence a row of trees and with them is
a row of trees and with them is in between them is shrubbery so that we're providing a really
significant upgrade and improvement to the landscaping so you get almost a triple row
effect of landscaping the street trees along the road the trees behind the fence and landscaping
in that area so the shrubs will block and minimize any impact from the headlights
and the trees will block the view of the building so it really does a full landscape package i did
want to note we are also providing it was in discussion with the neighbors providing some
additional shrubbery along broad streets so that the landscaping in that area also buffers
the visual impact of cars so candle leaves you're going by only if you're an angle will even
recognize um much of what's going on in this property so it'll be a little bit of a green
oasis that we're creating there we do provide a loading area along the side of the building
but overall and and just going back and clarifying is that that gate will close with committed to the
applicants committed to closing the gate on broad street after business hours so that this property
is not accessible to to the public i should say referred is only accessible during business hours
and otherwise it's fully gated off with no activity permitted during that time period
thank you and greg can you describe the impact of this type of retail use compared to other retail
uses so one of the interesting and sort of unique uh arrangements there we talked about a lot of
different uses that would be permitted on this site and most of them have a
very high turnover rate whether it's Starbucks type arrangement or a
convenience store type arrangement those food uses and things of that nature that
could come and go on here they have high turnover lots of activity on a
routine and active basis all day long type of deal this use it tends to have a
much lower uh what i'll call traffic count so that the number of cars coming in and out here
in the retail world it's a much lower trip generation than what you would experience
from other some of the other permissible uses thank you and how many parking spaces are being
provided there's 17 total and in your opinion that's more than sufficient for this site
that that that works well within um auto zones program
question if i could mr newell uh the masonry fence that runs from uh metarey avenue uh
along the property line how high what is the height of that fence
so you have a retaining wall which i believe is uh four feet five feet around four feet i think
and then a fence that's another four or five feet as well so you have a an effective barrier back
there question is there any pedestrian lighting along the sidewalks
is it i don't know um i apologize i don't know what the uh street lighting arrangement is out
there I see the one that Greg's pointing to right now that that's clear which
will relocate as part of our process for the thing there may be one other one
it's hard to tell I'm sure there's something on the dairy I honestly can't
see that from this plan on that note the community did ask that the lighting
within the property remain within the property, that the light shadows remain within the property
boundaries. You mentioned that in your opening statement, that and the security cameras. All
right. Okay. Thank you. Do you have anyone else, Ms. Tancredi? I do. Are there any further
questions for Mr. Newell? No. No. No. Thank you. I would ask Marshall Cook to be called.
Can they raise their hand?
I don't have anyone with that name okay maybe he's calling in with that I would call my
Maybe he's calling in.
With that, I would call my client, Carl Wright.
Carl can unmute himself and wait to be sworn in.
Ms. Sunkit, I believe that Marshall is on the phone.
He's not available by video, but on the phone.
Do you see him?
Well, he would have to provide the last three digits of his phone number.
Let me ask for that.
He's been unmuted and can wait to be sworn in.
This is Marshall Cook.
Cook, please spell your first and last name.
marshall m-a-r-s-h-a-l-l cook c-o-o-k
uh 2301 oh geez all right let me give it a regional office address sorry
all right why don't you do that just your involvement your your position with this um
i'm the yeah i'm the regional manager for autozone philadelphia
thank you swearing the firm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing about the truth
I do. Thank you, Ms. Campredi. Thank you. And Mr. Cook, you're familiar with the site
at 6301 North Broad Street and the proposed AutoZone here? Yes, I am. Okay, and have you had
the opportunity to hear the concerns that have been raised by the community? Yes, I have.
can you talk about your experience with auto zone in general first can you tell the board
what your geographical area is that you cover for auto zone sure my region covers 108 current
auto zone stores my region starts out in the lancaster area cuts across philadelphia i have
the southern half of New Jersey and the entire Delmarva Peninsula.
Thank you.
So you're familiar with auto zones in urban settings?
Yes, I am.
Are you familiar with issues?
Have you dealt with and addressed litter, security, and street activity?
Frequently, yes.
Okay, and can you tell the board how auto zone addresses these issues?
Well, in terms of litter and trash, we have something, police parking lots, dumpster areas, outside the store on a daily basis, making sure we're picking stuff up left by customers and just trash that accumulates or gets onto the property.
In terms of the, you were going to talk about lot mechanics, is that one of the ones you brought up?
so we don't i don't have any tolerance for lot mechanics and either um and when when possible
we uh we get the city's involvement to help us rid of that because i i do not want lot mechanics
on any of my properties just as much as the city and the people that live around the stores don't
want them. Thank you. Mr. Chairman, do you have any questions for Mr. Cook? Questions
from the board? No. No. No. Anyone else? Yes, I'd like to call Carl Wright.
So, and he's available. He can be sworn in chair.
Mr. Wright, please spell your name, first and last name, and give us your address.
R-O-C-A-R-L, Wright, W-R-I-G-H-T, 20 South Olive Street in Media, Pennsylvania.
Where is the whole truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Thank you. Please proceed.
okay and mr wright you've heard um do you adopt my testimony as though it were your own i do
and is it true and correct it is thank you is there anything additional that you would like to add
no thank you thank you all right i'll go back again any questions from the board
no no no okay anyone wish to testify in this case please raise your hand
here we have sorry we have hillary emerson from the council person's office
we have hillary emerson from the council person's office thank you good afternoon hillary
hi mr chair can you hear me yes a hillary emerson e-m-e-r-s-o-n on behalf of councilwoman
sherelle parker and do you swear to firm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the
truth i do thank you please proceed mr chair until um about 203 this afternoon um i had one
statement prepared um but my remarks changed at that point um it changed because we were advised
via email by miss tancredi that the community association had entered into a community benefits
agreement with the applicant a community benefits agreement that was not cleared with the neighbors
that the neighbors are in opposition to and they will speak here on it an agreement that
i know this board doesn't have control over but we would we would strenuously object to
I want to just give a little bit of history that wasn't previously provided regarding this project.
As this board knows, two weeks ago, the applicant requested a brief continuance from the board for additional time to work through concerns raised by the near neighbors in the hope that an agreement would be reached.
Our office did not oppose this request. In fact, at the applicant's request, we convened a meeting on September 30th with four of the near neighbors on North Park and Midary Avenues, along with representatives from the applicant and OLCA, the coordinating RCO.
During that meeting, there was an in-depth discussion of the proposed changes the applicant had made to the project to address the issues raised by the near neighbors.
Questions and concerns remained after this meeting, as well as a willingness to continue
the conversation. So our office, the applicant, and the near neighbors continued to dialogue over
the next couple of days to determine if a resolution could be reached. Ultimately,
the neighbors decided that they did not believe the proposed use was appropriate for this location.
And as I mentioned, I believe there are neighbors on the call here to explain why.
Because of the neighbor's opposition to this project, the councilwoman is in opposition
as well. We understand this is a commercial property, but there are also a number of
commercial uses, as some of which were mentioned by the applicant, that would be feasible at this
site other other options include grocery store consumer goods sit-down restaurant personal
services all of those are by right uses and i also wish to note that the rco in its previous two
letters to the board indicated that it was supporting the neighbors in opposing this project
We were not aware that they were having continuing conversations regarding a community benefits
agreement with the applicant or that one had been reached.
One that I might include, I might mention includes donations to the community organization.
The neighbors, like I said, were not involved in the discussion of this and had, were not
aware that the community organization had changed its position on this matter.
The community has made clear to our office that they do not wish to see
another auto-oriented business in this location because they have not had a
good experience with the current business in this location and as the
applicant attorney noted there are a number of other auto-oriented businesses already in this
area so this would be an oversaturation um based on the quality of life issues that the the
applicants excuse me that the residents the near neighbors who are most immediately affected by
this business have raised and their opposition the councilwoman strongly requests that this
board deny the variances requested in this case thank you thank you um miss emerson you did mention
that up until around 203 this afternoon uh you you had different information have you seen
the entirety of the community benefits agreement i've gotten to take a brief look at it
and the neighbors i shared it with one neighbor at that time um i don't know if any other neighbors
have seen at this point because I don't know who the who else the applicant has shared it with
That's where I was getting it.
that's where I was getting it I'm going to see how many people are aware of or made aware of what
I'm going to see how many people are aware of or made aware of what the community benefits
agreement had in it.
Ms. Tancredi, could you answer that?
Would you happen to know?
What I happen to know?
Would you happen to know if other neighbors were made aware of the community benefits
agreement that was put together by the RCO and your applicant?
So, Mr. Chairman, we've been meeting with the RCO as is customary.
we've reached out to the membership to the leadership of the rco we've had a couple meetings
with them we've we've made ourselves available to the rco since early may and we've provided
answers to all of their questions we've made changes to the plan just to policies we've
essentially addressed every issue that has been raised by the neighbors. And I've even followed
up with the councilwoman's office, because here we are the day of the hearing, and we've been
reaching out to them to say, if there are additional neighbors that have concerns,
please let us know who they are so that we can talk to them. I mean, just on Friday, I know that
my client met an adjacent neighbor at the property and we made arrangements to address the concern
about a gap in the fence between a neighbor's property and the auto zone property so we've
continued to make ourselves available with full transparency and really the the councilwoman's
office is here telling us that there are additional neighbors who have issues and
We've made ourselves available to everyone through the councilwoman's office, through the RCO, to answer and address and continue to discuss any questions.
So if there are additional neighbors here today with concerns, I'm not aware of which neighbors those are.
That was the answer. I wasn't accusing you or your client of not reaching out.
I just was wondering if, as of today, who were those other neighbors, and were they notified of the community benefits agreement?
Obviously, you can't answer that.
I can't answer that.
The agreement was provided to the leadership of the organization.
And with that being said, I mean, a lot of the issues that are memorialized in that agreement have been addressed throughout this process.
Mr. Chair, my objection is I don't believe that the agreement reflects the wishes of the near
neighbors who are the ones most immediately affected. It was entered into with the community
organization, which as of last we heard, was standing with the neighbors and opposing the
agreement. So this sudden turnaround is concerning and suspect and lacks transparency.
Again, what I'm asking is, Hillary, is does any of the near neighbors, were they made aware of
what's in the latest community benefits agreement only the one that i sent it to upon receiving it
i don't know if it was shared with anyone else but remember we only got it less than two hours
ago yeah yeah i understand that's what i'm getting at so it's possible that there's other near
neighbors who haven't seen the benefits agreement and it's possible that they may have a change of
heart that's all i'm saying they may i know i know that neighbors were are here prepared to
testify in opposition and had obtained petitions that they wanted to present to the board in
opposition understood but those folks we don't know when they get on we'll ask where are they
have they been made aware of the recent community benefits agreement the one that i was able to
reach at 203 yes other than that one the other i do not know mr chairman i i don't know why we're
the councilwoman's office is speaking so vaguely like which neighbors like we've made ourselves
available and in fact um i know that the near neighbors um are their concerns are addressed
specifically in the agreement all right let's see who gets who who testifies and where they live
okay we have a sharon wilson sharon you can unmute yourself and wait to be sworn in
wilson when you get on would you please spell your first and last name and give us your address
yes can you hear me yes we can great my name is sharon wilson s-h-a-r-o-n last name wilson w-i-l-s-o-n
and the address is 6220 north camac street north camac yes come back if i'm not mistaken runs
between Broad and 13th, correct? Oh, that's pretty good, Mr. DiCicco.
13th and 12th, is it? Yeah, that's right.
It's between 13th and 12th, correct? Yes, it is.
Okay. And do you swear and affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do. And what was it? I know it's Camac Street. What was the number? 6220.
What was it? I know it's Cammack Street. What was the number?
Okay, thank you. Please proceed.
Okay. I represent the OCA, the Community Association slash RCO. And we did, in fact, enter into a community benefits agreement. And there were perhaps conversations that the councilman or Hillary wasn't aware of.
we've been talking to the near neighbors repeatedly and in fact one of our most detailed
conversations happened on sunday they've allowed one of the neighbors to speak on their behalf
and we were having an ongoing issue with one of the neighbors joanne about the retaining wall
and as miss tancredi represented she went out the client actually went out and talked to her
and she felt that she had resolution apparently was regarding that particular wall the other
neighbors were also asked for certain things regarding lighting and curb cuts. We went out
and we physically walked with neighbors on Sunday, and we worked on Monday also talking to near
neighbors. So we talked to neighbors who were actually, when we walked around, in support of
AutoZone, and we talked to neighbors that were not in support of AutoZone. But the bulk of the
neighbors that we spoke with that came out at the RCL were in support if we could get certain
conditions and that's why we entered into the community benefit agreement. There are near
neighbors who haven't physically saw the agreement but are aware of what we were doing and what we
were offering and what we were authorized to agree to. Was it your intention to inform those
near neighbors who have not yet seen the community benefits agreement? Of course.
Well, once we were up against this deadline, that's the only reason why they haven't seen
the physical document, but they are aware of the parameters of the document.
That's understood. And when you say near neighbors, are you talking about folks on
Madari Street? Yes, on Madari, right across from the auto zone, on Park Avenue, that sort of goes
sort of a cat a corner from the auto zone we talked to the neighbors on the other side of
park avenue that would be behind the auto zone we also went to visit some neighbors on broad street
which is you know a little bit down from the auto zone but still close enough for us to be
considered near neighbors so there's still some legwork if you will that has to be done in terms
of making certain that everyone understands what is in the community benefits agreement
so that they can make a decision whether or not to support that is that accurate
no i would say we have authority to enter into what we actually did enter into
but as a community organization we're always willing to listen to our members
Well, that's what I'm asking. That's what I'm suggesting, is that those near neighbors on
Madari and Park Avenue that may not be aware of the community benefits agreement, I'm asking
that you and or whoever is on your board make that community benefits agreement
known to them so that they can make a more informed decision as to whether to support or
not support mr chair i also sorry this is hillary also the rco meeting hillary sorry can you hear
me now you broke up start again please yes sorry this this is hillary i just wanted to note that
in the meeting report that um that olka sent in it indicated that 22 of the affected addresses
versus seven were in opposition to the project that was the vote that they took at the rco meeting
So that clearly shows that there was opposition, strong opposition among the community at the time that this originally was met about a few weeks ago.
But again, that was prior to a community benefits agreement.
One that the neighbors were not participating in negotiating.
Right. I understand that. And that's why I'm asking if it's the applicant or Ms. Wilson or whoever runs the RCO, that they would make that community benefits agreement available to those folks who had not previously been made aware of what's in the benefits agreement and to see what, basically take a temperature to see what, if anything, if it changes their mind or not.
right right Sharon it has been an evolving conversation so when Hillary makes reference
to something that happened a few weeks ago that may be true but that is not what the current
that's not what the the current feeling is that was expressed to us and as you said we have no
problem with going out and showing the actual agreement to people that's that's not a problem
that's not a problem we we we're fine with the debt transparency i would just note that i talked
we we we're fine with the transparency
transparency.
to two neighbors this morning and they both told me that they were still ardently opposed to it so
and don you know which you name which neighbors because we met with them um last week there were
four neighbors in that call so you know which neighbors we were referring to i've asked multiple
times what i mean can you tell us now on the call on this call which neighbors are opposed
And again, I sound like a broken record.
They may be, it sounds to me that they may be neighbors who have not yet seen the community
benefits agreement.
Not suggesting that they will change their position, but we don't know until they see
Mr. Chairman, but without even facts with real names and real addresses, how can we just
continue this case?
I mean, one of the neighbors on the call was a Ms. Barbara who lives directly across the
street.
her concern had to do with the exit onto Madari and we've eliminated the exit on
Madari so her concern has been addressed Miss Joanne's issue had to do with the
fence we've addressed that issue so unless a specific name and address can
be raised here today there's nothing of substance sure we do have other people
wish to speak is it okay i i it is okay i just uh i don't want to go around in circles again my
assumption is that some of the folks who are calling in in opposition may not have seen that
community benefits agreement and i'll repeat it may not change their mind but at least i'd like
to know that everyone has given was given a full opportunity to see everything that's being proposed
only by the applicant and and that includes a community benefits agreement
so we have to figure out what the logistics would be
and i don't want to cut people off but we might be talking about something today
that becomes acceptable to some of the folks who are against it today i don't
know understood and all of the concessions
all of the requests um have been addressed and you know
perhaps we can agree to a very brief continuance in order for
this to be sorted out yeah that's what i'm going to suggest and i don't want to keep people on the
line because again testimony may change it may not i don't know but it may
so tanya any suggestions on how brief we can continue this case
and it'll only be for well testimony could we limit it sharon testimony from the rco
So the idea would be that we can do it for one week as a resumption hearing, if it's okay with Sharon, to allow brief, brief testimony, because we have a full docket.
so it would be coming back for any testimony from i assume um ms emerson the rco or any
individual affected neighbors who um disagree with the rco correct and that's fine and uh mr
chairman i do have a brief statement that i'd like to make on behalf of addressing the variances
and i can make that next week okay and i just would miss miss emerson is still there
uh yes i muted her uh hillary you can unmute yourself yes i'm here i i you you want you
understood what we're going to do here correct and and i would ask that there'd be full cooperation
between the rco and the councilwoman's office that on notice on notification as it relates
notification of the art of the community benefits agreement and any other outstanding issues
that's fine mr chair i just ask if it would be possible to let a couple of the neighbors who
have been waiting just speak briefly very brief because again things may change i understand
so we have um joanne who would like to speak who's one of the persons who says they're affected
Joanne you can unmute yourself wait to be sworn in. Joanne please spell your first and last name
and give us your address. Sure my name is Joanne Eggleston E the first name J-O capital A-N-N-E
last name Eggleston E-G-G-L-E-S-T-O-N. Your address? 6302 North Park Avenue.
Thank you, and do you swear and affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing
but the truth?
I do. And I've actually been the neighbor that they've been referring to as being in agreeance.
I do, and I've actually been the neighbor that they've been referring to.
And I am not in agreeance with the auto zone being put there. My house is adjacent. My house
is the house that they were talking about. They did come out because I needed them to see
the gap that was in the between the fence that's currently there in the back of our house.
And that is part of their property. So when we were on the Zoom call, and I'm so surprised
by and i was the one who she sent the um the agreement to and i'm really surprised that oka
agreed to this considering i and it's crazy because i was so upset i went around and got
um neighbors to sign we have neighbors i have four sheets of neighbors who have signed the
petition saying that they are against this auto zone one of which is one of which is i'm not i'm
still talking, one of which is Barbara. It's hearsay. It's hearsay. You have to speak for
yourself. Hello? Okay. She can unmute herself. As long as you talk over each other, we will not be
able to speak at all. Please. You can unmute yourself and speak. What I was saying is I don't
know how I would get these to you, but I have signed four pages of signed petition of neighbors
who are in total disagreeance and they're really upset about um the oka agreement i don't even want
to say what some of the neighbors said when they so i i and i am that neighbor that they were
referring to and i did not agree i only i don't think that i suggested that there was an agreement
with her i didn't hear her sorry i just had an objection to her um characterization of my
statement i indicated that we addressed the concern regarding the fence between
ms eggelson's property and auto zone you did thank you all right ms eggelson yes
i'm sorry you're muted
have a petition yeah yes i actually can share my screen of two of the pages because i scanned them
and i had was that that petition was taken prior to the community benefits agreement correct
it was taken today when some of them it was so we no one saw the agreement it was sort of hearsay
that this was what happened and i have neighbors on my block neighbors on madeary like i said i
have four pages of signed okay uh you can submit them to us uh miss sunker will tell you how to do
that and mr chairman it does sound like there's perhaps there's some miscommunication because i
can tell you that every request that's been made we've addressed in the community benefits agreement
and within meetings or emails so as you mentioned we're happy to continue to talk to the neighbors
and come back next week i don't want to belabor this application but i just sounds like there's
a few loose ends things may not change people may still you know be supportive or non-supportive
but i want to make sure we have all the loose ends tied up all right so is there anyone else uh
hillary i don't know if there's um if there's any other neighbors that wish to speak at this
time or if they wish to reserve their comments for the next hearing well i would appreciate it
if they'd be willing to wait till next hearing that would be helpful yeah i can't see who who
all is on so so why don't we do that uh tanya do we have a date yes next tuesday at two o'clock
mr chairman i would just ask that the names of these quote near neighbors are released to us
that way we're fully aware both sides both sides will have to share the information on both sides
And that we are able to talk with them.
So calendar number MI-2020-000826-6301 North Broad Street.
This hearing is being resumed until Tuesday, October the 13th at 2 o'clock, Tanya?
Correct, Chair.
Two o'clock, at which time we will consider any feedback related to the RCO.
No need to post, though, Dawn.
Thank you all.
Thank you.
Medium item MI 2020-001190, 6778-84, Bridge Avenue.
we have mr. DeMarco promoted to panelists
We have Mr. DeMarco promoted to panelists for this case.
Good afternoon, everybody.
I'm here.
Mr. DeMarco, you'll identify yourself.
You're still under oath.
Still under oath.
Richard DeMarco, I'm here for the applicant and owner.
Eric Marshall is on the call, I believe, also, and is my client and the representative of my client.
mr demarco have you emailed an exhibit packet with the required documents proof of ownership
proof of tax compliance copy of the refusal or referral photos and plans five days in advance
of this yes yes yes i did met with the rco and have a letter yes i did do that i did all that
i did coordinate with i did text with sharon and uh re-sent her the packet uh it did say that it
went through was two megabytes I'm not sure why she didn't get it but I emailed
it on Thursday on 1 25 p.m. and I do have a letter from the RCO we met with
the RCO we have a letter of support please represent your case thank you
briefly as you can yeah I could be brief this is a special exception case I'm
going to share my screen in a moment here i'll bring up the exhibits
it's a special exception case mr chairman this is an existing commercial space
within a property that is uh was legally constructed with an over-the-counter
permit for the cmx 2.5 zoning classification
again just a special exception due to the overlay the ridge
avenue overlay a medical practitioner requires a special exception even though um we actually did
try and here's the referral uh you see here we're not required to prove hardship uh the reason for
the referral and i i'll try to be brief it's an overlay i don't actually believe that it's a really
a medical office in that sense of the word i believe our doctor our optometrist is on the
call as well. He's an optometrist. He does not do surgery or administer anesthesia. He measures
eyeglasses and sells eyeglasses, but he is a doctor, so I think that's why Elle and I insisted
that we go to the board. This is our application for special exception. Met with the RCO. They
understood. We have both RCOs support, by the way. I'll show you the layout. My client produced a
nice that's the existing structure there's other business uses this is
Ridge Avenue which is a commercial mixed commercial residential corridor but
there's a lot of commercial that's our floor plan there's really no medical
waste as it's defined but you know obviously the optometrist is going to
handle any trash appropriately and in a you know in with compliance with any
regulations again there's no medical waste so that so to speak this is his current location
um he has to move to this location his lease is ending at the other location i see you still
haven't mastered the rotation of your i know i you know i'll take a course on that mr chairman
uh i don't know what else i tried to play with these parts i'll move on this is the notice
these are our proof of mailing we did all the mailings consistent with the current code for
the zoom meeting that we had with rich park civic i'll show you the rco letter in a minute
existing photos that's the notice posted on the property updated tax cert deed
let me give you sure I'll show you the RCO let's make sure you can see the mixed-use nature of
Ridge Avenue this is our building here and you can see other commercial uses some residential
Ridge Avenue this is our building here and you can see other commercial uses some residential
but commercial in nature and again this this is our property you see the CMX 2 zoning CMX 2 here
and here an existing commercial space that needs a tenant i'll i'll go to the rco letter
oh i just want to show you the old permit
that's the building that's the current structure this was an over-the-counter
we completely complied with the uses this is the permit uh you can see here vacant commercial space
we didn't expect to have to get a certificate for this but there's nothing unusual about it
uh i'm going to call oh that's the old that's my case a minute ago sorry here it is
here it is here's the rich park seven association support letter this is our
here's the rich parks have been associated
our doctor right here let me ask eric marshall to be recognized so he could
adopt my testimony and answer a quick question
barrack's on the call
i'm on uh mr marshall please identify yourself for the record
Eric Marshall, owner of 6778-84 Ridge Holdings LLC.
And you swear and affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Mr. DeMarco?
Eric, just briefly, did you hear my factual testimony adopted as your own as true and
accurate?
Is there anything unusual about this office that would make it unusual for Tomister's
office as far as you know?
uh and is this an existing commercial space where this is the tenant that you have been
able to identify for this space yes okay uh is the optometrist on the call uh
i believe he was going to participate i just want to ask him one quick question
then we can be done with it
there he is jeffrey jeffrey brosall yes i'm here
Doc, would you please identify yourself, spell your first and last name?
My name is Jeffrey, J-E-F-F-R-E-Y, Brosof, B as in boy, R-O-S-O-F.
Doctor, did you hear my factual testimony?
Can you adopt it?
Let me swear.
Do you swear and affirm?
Do you swear and affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Please.
Go ahead, Mr. DeMarco.
Thank you.
Doctor, did you hear my testimony?
Do you adopt it as your own, as true and accurate?
Is there anything unusual or unique about your optometrist operation that would make it more adverse and more impactful than any other optometrist office?
My main function is to examine eyes, prescribe glasses, dispense contact lenses.
We don't deal in medical procedure.
We don't use syringes.
I don't have a medical wastebasket.
It's all common stuff.
So, yeah, it's pretty simple stuff.
That's all I have, Mr. Chairman.
Obviously, I feel we easily meet the standard for special exception.
We got caught in an overlay.
This is clearly the type of use that's intended for this location.
Questions from the board?
Anyone else wish to testify in this case?
If so, please raise your hand.
No hands at this time. Thank you. Planning Commission. Good afternoon Chairman,
members of the board, Ian Litwin, Planning Commission staff. This proposal supports
the local commercial corridor which contains many other medical office uses.
The proposed use will not cause detrimental impacts beyond that which
might normally be expected from the proposed use. Therefore we have no
opposition to granting the special exception. Thank you. MI-2020-00-1190-6778-84 Ridge Avenue.
My vote is yes. My vote is yes. My vote is yes. My vote is yes. Before we begin, the court
reporter, we have one more case and then we'll take a break. Does that work for you?
that's fine thank you everyone have a good afternoon
okay confessor okay m i 2020 dash zero zero zero one four one 94 15 boston avenue
Sean Ward, you've been promoted to panelists.
You can unmute your mic and wait to be sworn in.
Good afternoon, Mr. Chair, members of the board.
Good afternoon, Sean.
You swore our firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, for nothing but the truth?
Do you agree to waive the reading of its refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Have you emailed an exhibit packet with the required documents, proof of ownership, proof of tax compliance, copy of the refusal or referral?
Yes, I have.
Awesome. Have you met with the RCO and have a letter?
Thank you. You may proceed.
Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman, members of the board.
Sean Ward, on behalf of the applicant, my address is 331 East Street Road, Trevos, Pennsylvania, 19053.
On the conference today is my client, Peter Borgman.
On the conference today is my client, Peter Borgman.
I asked Peter to raise his hand so that way Tanya can identify him.
He has a different old version of Zoom, so he can't be promoted to speak.
Oh, okay.
All right, I'm going to share my screen at this time.
can everybody see my screen yes sure okay thank you very much tanya mr chairman i've sent in my
typical exhibit packet which includes a1 is the notice of refusal this was an application for a
permit for a business and professional office on the first floor front of an existing attached
a semi-detached structure with two existing apartments, one at the first floor rear,
one at the second floor. Because this represented a change in use of the commercial space,
it resulted in a refusal, not for the commercial space, but for the existing two-family dwelling.
Accordingly, we seek to affirm our use and obtain a variance today. A2 is the
ZBA application, transmittal letter, the application of appeal, the PIF, or project information form.
A4 is proof of ownership. It's the subject property deed. And then we have A5 is the
proof of tax compliance, showing that all tax payments are made through 2020.
A7 is the letter of support from a letter of support from Greater Busselton Civic League.
We had a phone conference meeting with them last week, and they voted by a vote of 10
to 1 to support the application, and followed by that is the Councilman O'Neill's letter
of non-opposition to the subject application.
Moving on with the exhibits, you'll see it's an attached structure.
We have proof of posting the subject property, three existing electric meters on the property.
The apartments are accessed from the rear.
There's an upstairs apartment and then there's a downstairs apartment.
The property is situated in between a Midas muffler shop to the north
and Epi's Tire and Service Center to the south.
The property is located on Busselton Avenue in between Grant Avenue to the north
and Welsh Road to the south.
Again, just some photos of the subject area.
With regard to the zoning history, it's important to note that 1989,
it was zoned as a beauty shop and two apartments.
1970 a one of the apartments was converted into a barber shop so it's a barber shop a beauty shop
in one apartment for some time prior to that 1967 again it was a beauty shop and two apartments
and then as far back as 1950 you'll see it was a real estate office and two apartments so
So we sent the RCO meeting notice out with a copy of the refusal, a copy of the zoning notice,
and a copy of the 1989 permit, which was the most recent permit indicating that it was a beauty shop
and a two-family dwelling. That's just a copy of a returned letter that was undeliverable,
our certificate of mailing copy of the zoning map you'll see the property is
owned CA1 auto related commercial again you'll see Welsh Road to the south and
then Grand Avenue to the north and then here's an aerial photo and that is the
substance substance and subject of the application given the fact that it's
been used as a two-family dwelling with a commercial space since 1950 or better, we
would ask that the board grant the request of relief today. If Mr. Boardman was available
to testify, he would certainly affirm the truth and veracity of my statements to the
board and would adopt them as his own testimony. Thank you. Question from the board. No.
anyone else wish to testify in this case please raise your hand here we have a
bernard bernard you can unmute yourself and wait to be sworn in
Bernard, you can unmute yourself and wait to be sworn in.
Bernard?
Okay, Chair, you can move on.
Hello? Can you hear me?
Now we can.
I was having problems unmuting.
Please identify yourself, first and last name.
Bernard Carl Jadak.
I'm the zoning chair for Greater Busville and Civic.
I wanted to make sure you got the RCO letter and everything.
We support it.
Bernard, could I ask you to spell your last name, please?
J-A-D-A-C-H.
Thank you.
And complete your, I'm sorry, finish with your testimony.
Was he sworn in, Chair?
Swear and affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Thank you, Tanya.
all right please proceed yeah i'm the zoning chair for the rco greater bustle and civic league
um i just wanted to make sure you got our uh letter which you did okay and uh uh
uh uh uh for it okay in support of it uh and uh um yeah that's basically it i just and uh
So our only other thing was some basic housekeeping on the building would be appreciated.
Yeah, I noticed some of that myself, especially where the electric meters were.
Yes, there's a bunch of areas like that.
Yeah, Mr. Chairman, my client's father owns the property, but Hans Boardman is the owner of the property.
He's retired, and Peter is now going to take over responsibilities for management of the property.
thank you and we did discuss that at the rco conference call thank you uh planning commission
good afternoon chairman members of the board ian litwin planning commission staff
the comprehensive plan recommends this parcel be zoned cmx2 and it is within the old buston
town center focus area from the far northeast district plan this proposal conforms with cmx2
zoning district requirements therefore we have no opposition to granting the variance thank you
mi-2020-0001419415 busselton avenue my vote is yes my vote is yes my vote is yes
my vote is yes mr chairman thank you very much that concludes my business may i be excuse yes
you may thank you very much everybody have a great day thank you likewise
Tanya and Sharon any unfinished business on the two o'clock list nothing that's it all right so
we'll reconvene at 4 45. sounds good okay thank you see you then
thank you
all right everyone here let's see tom confessor and jim we're all here yep we're here all right guys
thank you everyone's ready all right good afternoon everyone my name is frank de chico
I'm the chair of the zoning board of adjustment. I'll be participating in today's hearing along
with our board secretary, Confessor Plaza, and board members, Mr. Thomas Holloman and Mr. James
Snell. Board administrator, Tanya Sunkit, and board attorney, Sharon Saleta, are also in attendance.
For those of you who haven't yet participated in one of our virtual hearings, I'll go through some
of the basics of what you can expect. First, we will be administering oaths to individual
participants prior to their testimony. Second, for the benefit of anyone participating by phone,
we ask that attorneys and witnesses identify themselves prior to speaking or testifying.
Third, we'd like to advise everyone that this proceeding is being recorded
and that by participating you acknowledge your agreement to be recorded.
Fourth, anyone participating by phone, if you wish to testify, you must raise your hand by hitting star nine and then star six to unmute yourself.
I'll repeat, for anyone participating by phone, if you wish to testify, you must raise your hand by hitting star nine and then star six to unmute yourself.
Finally, to enter an appearance statement, call Google 267-270-5548 and leave your email address
two seven zero five five four eight and leave your email address and the address of the property at
issue. I'll repeat to enter an appearance statement call google two six seven two seven zero five
five four eight and leave your email address and the address of the property at issue. That being
said we will begin but before we begin excuse me i'd like to ask if anyone is requesting a
continuance or a withdrawal of an appeal listed for this afternoon's hearing and i will note
that as I noted at the beginning of the two o'clock session,
that MI-2020-000044-1925 North 4th Street
is scheduled for tomorrow at 3.30, not this afternoon.
Chair, this is Tanya speaking.
if i may i have received a continuance request from the attorney of record jeffrey young
for number three on your list okay mi-2020-001010 2608 west dolphin street is continued
okay chair if i may i have a situation that arose with 3522 arthur street number five on your list
okay it was scheduled for today however the applicant of record
was not notified therefore i rescheduled it for 10 21 20 at 2 pm
10 20 or 10 21 10 21 20 wednesday the 21st at 2 p.m okay mi-2020-0007513522 arthur street
is continued till October the 21st at 2 p.m? Correct. Now, I do have a hand up. Jeffrey Young,
you've been unmuted. You can speak to a continued. Good afternoon, Mr. Young. Please identify
yourself, spell your first and last name, and give us your address. Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman.
Jeffrey Young, J-E-F-F-E-R-Y-Y-O-U-N-G, 3900 Ford Rue, Suite B, Philadelphia PA, 19131.
I am...
Do you swear to the firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Thank you.
Please proceed.
Mr. Chairman, I am speaking at the moment in regards to the continuing request for meeting
ID 2020-001010, 2608 Dolphin Street. My client and I have been unsuccessful in meeting with the
community, so we are asking for a continuous at this time. All right, that's already been put on
the record. That case will be continued. Thank you. You can speak to Ms. Sunkett about a date.
thank you thank you that's all the hands i have chair okay uh before we begin let's see um
confessor i think we had a request to call some cases out of order yeah i believe number seven
yeah okay you'll start with that one please okay meeting item mi 2020-000049 53 north 52nd street
mr bertill uh yes steve bertill has been promoted to panelists
and just the fyi this is a resumption hearing yes from september
yeah thank you you're still on the roof thank you uh good afternoon members of the board mr chairman
thank you mr do i need to be i had an earlier meeting so i think i'm yeah you're still on
there you're still on the roof okay thank you um uh as miss sunk it uh please identify yourself
for the record? Oh, my apologies. Steve Bertil, B-E-R-T-I-L, 1835 Market Street, Suite 1400,
Philadelphia PA 19103. I am here on behalf of the applicant for 53 to 59 North 52nd Street,
MI-2020-000049.
MI 2020-000049. As Ms. Sunkett stated, we're here for a resumption hearing. We
appeared, by way of a brief background, we appeared before the board on September
1st on this application and presented and put on evidence and testimony
regarding a entrepreneurship hub at this location. At that time, we had multiple meetings with the
RCO in the community and the RCO leadership. We heard testimony from both the applicant regarding
the attention of the project, but also the RCO, both the coordinating RCO and then also
or the other RCO that's located in that area regarding their support and concept,
but they had some questions, or not questions,
they had some items or issues regarding the massing that we had to work out with them.
As such, at the end of that hearing, Mr. Chairman,
you suggested that we continue this matter to allow further conversation between ourselves
and RCO leadership in conjunction with the councilwoman's office to reach an
agreement regarding the massing and any outstanding issues I'm pleased to say
that those meetings were productive and that we have actually I just realized my
screen is not sharing share that I'm pleased to say that those meetings are
productive and that we have reached an agreement regarding the design and
massing of the building and as such we have received letters of support from
both RCOs both the 44th Democratic Ward which you can see here and
also from Achievability which was the coordinating RCO for this project and
application. We have submitted a revised plan that reflects the changes that were
agreed upon regarding the massing of the building, as you can see regarding this
proviso form that we have set back to fourth and fifth floor, five feet, creating
a small terrace. Let me zoom out a little bit so you get a better... there you go.
And therefore, we're resulting in this current design, which we did submit separately to board council for provisal approval.
As such, we're asking the board to approve this project pending this agreement, or not pending, but due to reaching the agreement regarding the massing and design of the building,
and that we have been able to reach an agreement in principle regarding that all the matters that
we discussed at the last hearing with the RCO and that should be executed imminently as such
we hope that the board will see that this is a great project for this area and that we can
obtain variance support. Mr. Bertil, a revised plan how many pages? It's four and I submitted
uh all four um only because each is reflective of the setback so just i just i just need to know
so i when i call the proviso win i know how many pages oh understood okay okay thank you do you
have anybody any witnesses uh no not at this time unless my understanding is that um we we completed
all the testimony that we wanted to completed at the last hearing um and we were just needed to
close this final loop with the the rcos and wait for a vote thank you uh questions from the board
no no anyone else wish to testify in this case if so please raise your hand
we have andrew goodman from the council person's office
Andrew, unmute yourself and wait to be sworn in.
Good afternoon, Mr. Goodman.
Please identify yourself for the record.
Good afternoon.
Andrew Goodman, G-O-O-D-M-A-N,
representing Office of Third District Council Member, Jamie Gaudier.
We're going to affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth,
and nothing but the truth.
Yes, I do.
Thank you.
Please proceed.
So just here today to affirm what I submitted
in kind of electronic testimony.
We're here to kind of affirm the progress that's been made in collaborative dialogue between the development team, multiple representatives from community organizations, as well as our office.
the development team multiple representatives from community organizations as well as our office we've
participated in those conversations and are kind of pleased with the with the progress and the
revisions so we're here to amend our previous written statement requesting a continuance to
one of support obviously with you know providing the the updated plan documentation thank you
uh planning commission
good afternoon uh board my name is peter bernard speaking for the planning commission
peter spell your last name please b as in boy is an apple r n a r d
we're in the firm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth
yes thank you please proceed this property is recommended for commercial mixed use on the
comprehensive plan. This site is in close proximity to the market Frankfort L 52
second street stop. We have no objection to the density of the building but would
recommend that the applicant work at amending the plan to include a bonus
element that would permit the additional height as of right.
MI-2020-000049-53 North 52nd Street. My vote is yes with the proviso revised plan.
Four pages approved today. Yes with proviso. Yes with proviso.
Yes, with a visor.
Thank you, members of the board.
Thank you.
Confessor, I believe there was another one.
We have a request that was requested.
Mannheim Street.
Yes, it's on your list.
160 West Mannheim.
Rachel Prusker.
I don't have it, so, Confessor, you'll have to read it off.
I don't have it either, Sharon.
I'll read it off.
Excuse me, this is Sharon.
It's included on the add-ons that I emailed you this morning.
Oh, sorry about that.
Yeah, you're right.
Let me locate it.
Give me one second.
Sharon, just give us the MI number, please.
Is it 2020-000799?
160 Manheim Street?
That's correct.
All right.
Thank you.
I'll read it in.
Confessor, you have it.
You can read it in.
If not, I'll do it.
I don't have it now.
All right.
Calendar number MI2020-000799160 Mannheim Street.
Rachel, you're still under oath.
Do you agree to waive the reading of its refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Have you emailed an exhibit packet with the required documents, proof of ownership,
proof of tax compliance copy of the refusal referral photos and plans five days in advance
of this year yes also have you met with the rco and have a letter yes thank you you may proceed
please identify yourself for the record rachel r-a-c-h-a-e-l pritzker p-r-i-t-z-k-e-r 1635
market street suite 1600 philadelphia pa 19103 i'm just trying to pull up the rco letter um
This was from, I guess, a week or two ago where we put on the case and then we had the RCO meeting.
I'm just trying to bring up the letter from the RCO.
Does the board recall this or do you want me to go back through the hearing pack and everything?
You can give us just a couple of pieces.
I don't remember.
Maybe when I see something.
Happy to.
Some bullet points.
Okay. So this is 160 Mannheim, which is an existing duplex in a Germantown twin. The property
zoned RSA 5, I believe. However, this has been an existing duplex for years. There's tenants in it.
There's a family living in the top unit and a single female living in the bottom unit.
it's RSA 3 and it's an existing structure so this is the aerial view of
the property as you can see it's a almost I think 3,000 square foot
structure I think it's like 2,700 square feet this is the front of the structure
with the zoning posters again this is the site over here
here we were refused given the fact that it's a duplex
We were refused, given the fact that it's a duplex in RSA 3, however, again, it's an
existing duplex.
It's got two entrances, I'll get to the photos in a minute, and it also, again, has a housing
rental license for two units.
When my clients, who are the recent owners, purchased it, they were provided with these
documentations and told it was a legal duplex.
Again, there's housing rental licenses.
The other refusal that was generated was for the off-street parking.
As you'll be able to see in the pictures that I provided, there's a grade change, and there's this stone fence, if you will.
So trying to provide accessory off-street parking is impossible on this site without having to demo this and then parking in the front yard, which is not possible.
There's a rear yard for these properties, but not accessed by a rear street in which we can provide parking.
We did agree with the RCO to provide some street trees and other, and we have an indoor mailbox and things of that nature.
I just want to bring up the RCO vote.
So it was for, opposed, for, and support.
so I think it was a tie as such we went and got letters of support from the
near-neighbors which we provided to the board
let's go through this 162 173 171 140 and I think based on the RCO's letter
that I guess it was a three four or five family dwelling for a long time then there was a permit
for single family in 2003 but it was never converted to a single family and left as a duplex
we did agree with the community group to authorize the planning of a street tree and install planners
along the curb which help will help because there's cars parking on the sidewalk and a rain
barrel, which is one of the things they wanted in planners for stormwater management. We also
agreed to interior storage space for tenant trash. And we have a, we provided them information with
the property maintenance company as well, which one of the owners of this property actually works
for a property management company. The mailbox is already inside of the building. I'll get to show
you interior photos in a minute. And we have security lights as well. Although the civic
understood that you know they prefer home ownership and single-family they
did understand that this was an existing duplex and I think that's why there was
a four to four vote I just want to show the interior photos of the site so that
you can see how built out this already is so we have the living room the first
unit we have let me just get to the front photos your documents maybe
here's the housing rental licenses which show that it was two units wow that's really small
can the board see that
is that better yes okay um and i just want to add the interior photos
help me photo showing where the trash will be stored i think the first floor has access to the
yard yeah the first floor has access to the yard i do believe that we had just here's the when you
walk in. Here's the front photo. So you can see there's a unit here and a unit here. I think we
had the both of them store them inside instead of putting them in the front. And I think there's
also storage in the rear. However, I don't think that anybody actually was utilizing it, but we
did make that available. The community group preferred that they stored inside, which I
believe that's where the tenants are storing. Anyways, I do have Job Itzkowicz and Joseph
Bernstein as well who are the owners and they could provide some insight as to
the situation with the trash, but I don't believe that exterior trash was
something that the community really wanted on this site. All right. Do you
need to bring a witness on? Yes, please. Tanya, do you see Joseph Bernstein and
And Job, it's go-aheads.
We have Bernstein, I'm muted, and we have, Job is, um,
I'm muted, and we have, Job is on an older version, so it won't allow me to let you speak.
One is sufficient.
Joseph, are you there?
Yes, hi.
Can you hear me?
Yes, Joseph, please spell your first and last name and give us your address.
Certainly.
Joseph Bernstein, J-O-S-E-P-H, last name Bernstein, B-E-R-N-S-T-E-I-N.
My home address is 150 West Penn Street, P-E-N-N, Philadelphia, PA-19144.
Thank you.
We're infirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the trash.
I certainly do.
Joseph, can you just answer some of the chairman's questions about the trash?
Is there exterior trash in the rear?
We had intended to set up sort of like a gated trash area, which we thought would be more appealing to the tenants.
The RCO indicated they did not wish for that to occur, and that is entirely suitable.
Both tenants currently store their trash in the property have indicated they have no problem doing so.
Okay. Also, just to put on record from before that this is already built out, that you have
tenants in there, and it's the same tenants that were there when you purchased the property as well.
Absolutely correct.
Okay. And have you heard the rest of my testimony today? And do you adopt it as your own?
Yes, I do.
Happy to take any questions. Oh, and also, Joseph, can you, you were the one who walked
around to get near neighbor support, correct?
Yes, I did.
Okay. And do you affirm that those signatures are accurate and that
it was actually signed by near neighbors yes correct i do okay thank you happy to take any
questions that the board has questions from the board no no anyone else wish to testify in this
case if so please raise your hand we have someone with the last three digits five five five you can
unmute your mic and wait to be sworn in chair they're available to be sworn in okay um whoever
you are please identify yourself first and last name would this be miss weiss allison
i believe that's her number yeah i think so too
um for some reason allison you're unmuted you have to speak to this case
Allison okay now try speaking Ms. Weiss just talked
Planning Commission
Good afternoon board Peter Bernard for the Planning Commission
this property is indicated for single family residential use in the comprehensive plan
it is clear from the materials submitted by the applicant that the property has a history
of being used as a multi-family property we do not feel that the property proposed use would
have an adverse impact on the surrounding community accordingly we have no objection
to the granting of the variances for use and parking thank you mi-2020 this is um sharon
saletta i know ms weiss has emailed about this case if she would like to put something on the
record she can call me and i will put her on speaker phone tanya do you have any way of
what's that sharon of contacting miss weiss no okay
do you want me to try her i have her look like she hung up
so she's probably going to call you okay so she hung up
i'm happy to try and call her as well well we're not going to hold this case up
I mean, with all due respect, we have other cases to hear.
I appreciate your offer, but...
and they sent the letter right yes ma'am so we're good
And they sent the letter, right?
Yes, ma'am.
So we're good.
okay thank you all right mi-2020-000799 160 manheim street my vote is yes um she's calling
right now my vote is yes my vote is yes my vote is yes allison are you there
Yeah, I'm here.
They just voted the case?
Yeah, I'm the only license that was on record that we had access to had single-family rentals.
I hear what she's saying, and she's not under oath.
Maybe you can have a conversation with her, Sharon.
I will.
Yes, I'll do that.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Next case.
You're welcome.
Medium item MI 2020, 001009, 809 Diamond Street.
Attorney is Jeffrey Young.
What number is that, Professor?
The first one on the 330 list.
Mr. Young, you have been promoted to a panelist.
You can share your screen and unmute yourself and wait to be sworn in.
Great. Can everyone hear me?
Yes, and I believe you've already been sworn in, Mr. Young.
Thank you.
Yes. Good afternoon.
You have some other questions. Confessor?
Yes. You agree to wait the reading of his refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
yes have you emailed an exhibit packet within with the required documents proof of ownership
proof of tact compliance copy of the refusal or referral photos and plans five days in advance
of this hearing so the exhibit packet was emailed i'm not sure if it was received
okay it was received it was received i don't believe until yesterday but it was received
okay okay have you met with the rco and have a letter yes we have met with the rco and have
a letter of non-opposition okay mr chair
mr young you're swearing we're a sworn man he's sworn in already yeah yes please proceed
Thank you. Good afternoon, members of the board. Again, Jeffrey Young, 3900 Ford Road, Suite B, Philadelphia PA, 19131. I'm here today representing the applicant, 800 Diamond LLC.
800 Diamond LLC owns the subject property located at 809 West Diamond Street and 811-13
West Diamond Street. On or about May 12th, the applicant filed an application with L&I
seeking to consolidate the lot lines for the properties to develop 11 multifamily apartment
units. Three refusals were generated and I will go through those refusals in a
second. Here are the D's for the property.
The next slide should be the Philadelphia tax clearance. And here is
an overlay of the zoning for the property. The property is located on the northwest corner of
Darien and Diamond Street in North Philadelphia section of the city, and the property is currently
zoned as CMX2, which, as we all know, is a commercial mixed-use zoning district.
Now, if you take a look here at the map, you see everything in the orange is a residential
multifamily. And everything in this light pink color here is CMX2. And our property is where
this black arrow is, situated on the northwest corner. As you can take a look here from Germantown
Avenue pretty much to the east, to 10th Street, to the west, most of the north side of Diamond Street
is zoned with the CMX2 classification. However, there are very, very little commercial uses
on this stretch of Diamond Street. This stretch of Diamond Street is primarily residential
outside of your traditional bodega corner store.
um outside of your traditional um bodega corner store which primarily are
situated on the south side of diamond street
again as i mentioned the proposal is to uh to build 100 residential use for 11 units
as you can see from the rendering uh the design combines traditional red brick
of the neighborhood with some modern elements um by right uh the applicants are able to build
uh six units um however i'm trying to conform uh the project with the neighborhood
has generated our refusals.
The, again, three refusals were generated by Illinois.
The first refusal was issued after the department determined
that a residential use on the ground floor is prohibited
in CMX2 zoning districts.
the second refusal was generated because the department determined that only six
residential units could be built on the site without the requested relief
and the third refusal was issued regarding the proposed open space
of the development uh lni has determined uh that we do not meet the the open space uh requirement
here. So I'm going to discuss the project. Again, so the project, we're asking for 11
multifamily units. The unit will consist of, excuse me, on the first floor through basement
level one by level two-bedroom unit in the first floor uh rear there's two-bedroom two-bathroom
units and from floors two through four there will be two-bedroom two-bathroom there'll be
one two-bedroom two-bathroom units excuse me and two one-bedroom one-bathroom units
uh here shows the breakdown um i can zoom in if there are any questions of the breakdown
on what the unit sizes are but you can zoom in that would be helpful yes
large moment to swing yeah yes I will zoom in here should be one unit will be
about the first floor units will be about a thousand square feet and the two
bedroom units will be about 700 square feet i will scroll down the floor plan on the right is on the
left excuse me is the first floor plan um and on the right or floors two through four i'm have the
same design i'm going to scroll back out here just going to show you some pictures of the property
Currently, the property is a vacant lot. There previously was a church on 811-13 that was
dilapidated, underused, floors collapsing, roof collapsing, so there was no potential rehab or
use of that particular building. The property at 809 was previously abandoned property owned by
the Philadelphia Housing Authority here you can see this is the current view of
the property again it's a vacant lot the previously these are the previous
structures on the property as you can see a boarded up property at 809 was
Philadelphia Housing Authority was not using and again a church here that was
underutilized with major damage to give you a feel for the neighborhood this
neighborhood has a lot of vacancies and therefore as is right for development as
you can see in this picture there's new construction going on this is the this
is Darien Street looking north this is also Darien Street to the north of our
project um with uh 9th street looking straight through this vacant lot here
this is the south side of diamond street this is directly across the street uh from our uh property
and this is the south uh excuse me south west southeast corner um of eighth
and diamond this is the eighth and diamond playground um and also the
um and also the another property across the street from ours is the uh a neighborhood deli
again more vacancies in the neighborhood this is directly to the east of our property
uh more vacancy in this this neighborhood this neighborhood um is pretty much blighted and is
of need of some major uh redevelopment um in order to to be sustainable and so support um you know
the city services and things as such here's an overview of the neighborhood uh if you look to
the left you'll see a yellow star that is where our property is um and if you can see much of the
green that's here again just to give a picture of the amount of mass vacancy in this neighborhood
and the amount of development it would take to get this neighborhood back to a productive use.
Here is a property that is directly south, one block south of our project,
just to give a sense of the size and scale of the types of development
that are coming to this particular neighborhood.
This is on Darien and Norris, which is exactly one block south of our project.
here is a property that is three blocks away at 11 in sesquahanna again showing you the size
um and scale of the types of development that is happening in this particular neighborhood
um our proposal is not um outside of the the size um and scale um of this particular neighborhood
and here is a view of the front of that particular building again our trash will be stored in the
basement as well as a bicycle storage our client is committed to building
affordable housing the neighborhood this is a rendering of project that our
client is building I'm at 11th and diamond in this particular neighborhood
also on the 1900 block 2000 block 2100 block of North 8th Street they're
currently developing 30 affordable housing units and currently have more
affordable housing units in this neighborhood then they have market rate units in this neighborhood
um so my client is committed to developing in this neighborhood not just market rate units
but also affordable housing units um as well
and you know with that um i in my presentation and ask the board do they have any questions
do you have any witnesses mr young uh yes um the one of the principals uh max krankel
oh could you please uh identify yourself spell your name for the record and give us your address
max you can unmute yourself and wait to be sworn in perfect
all right max please again uh spell your name first and last name for the record
max frankel m-a-x-f-r-a-n-k-e-l uh 1401 spruce street apartment 1306 philadelphia pa 19102
to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth i do thank you please proceed mr young
Max have you heard my testimony I have can you stipulate to the accuracy of my testimony
it is 100 accurate do you adopt my testimony as your own I do thank you Mr. Chair thank you
uh any questions from the board no that's true anyone else wish to testify in this case if so
please raise your hand no hands sure thank you planning commission good
afternoon board Peter Bernard for the Planning Commission these properties are
zoned for commercial mixed-use the applicant has not demonstrated a
sufficient hardship for the ground floor commercial additionally we feel the
density of the residential component represents an overuse of the property
accordingly we object to the granting of the variances for use open space and
height thank you mr chair may i uh address the the height issue we are not refused for height
um on this particular project um our only refusals are for the use of the properties
um i understand the planning commission may say uh feel that it's an overuse um however if you
look at this particular neighborhood um commercial uses are not viable on this diamond street um
Quarter so all we're asking is to replace the commercial uses that are required on the first floor with a hundred percent residential uses
Which match the entire neighborhood primarily so noted. Thank you
MI-2020-0014
mi-2020-001406 809-13 diamond street my vote is yes my vote is yes my vote is yes my vote is yes
my vote is yes thank you mr chair that clues my business i may excuse yes you may have a good
have a good day thank you okay uh meeting item mi 2020-000702 3401 tampa street
this is Sharon um we didn't receive exhibits for that Mr. DeMarco is listed as the attorney
but he he was unfamiliar with the case if you could continue it he's going to look into it
Yeah, because earlier you said I'm done for the day. I was curious. Okay. MI-2020-000702, 3401 Tampa Street is continued.
Okay. Medium item MI-2020-001-214-531-Live Z Street.
that is l-i-v-e-z-e-y street mr black you've been promoted to a panelist
you can share your screen as necessary and wait to be sworn in okay we're can you hear me okay yes
okay good evening sir uh you swear to affirm to tell the truth the whole truth for nothing but
the truth yes i do uh and do you agree to waive the reading of his refusal and stipulate to its
accuracy yes i do okay have you emailed an exhibit packet with the required documents proof of
ownership proof of tax compliance copy of the refusal or referral photos and plans five days
in advance of this year yes yes i have okay it was only one thing if i can comment the letter
from the RCO, they forgot to do it, and she sent it to me on Saturday with an oops, oops.
No problem.
Did you meet with the RCO, though?
Yes, I met with them.
I have the minutes.
This is Sharon.
I can confirm that we received a letter from the RCO, and they support the application.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Can you please identify yourself for the record?
William Black, 507 Old Forge Road Media PA.
Would you like me to spell?
W-I-L-L-I-A-M, Black, B-L-A-C-K, 507 Old, O-L-D, Forge, F-O-R-G-E, Road, Media, M-E-D-I-A, P-A, 19063.
Thank you. You may proceed.
Okay, we are going to begin by sharing screen.
What would you like to share?
so who's presenting who's presenting uh my daughter's helping me on a computer
i'm uh i'm not that familiar with it so she's just no problem neither am i
so you can present and she can do the screen yeah she's not going to say anything i'll tell
you what comes up on the screen all right mr black thank you okay uh just to start off i'm
not a lawyer and after listening to these meetings i don't know maybe i should have gotten a lawyer
But it's a family house that has been in our possession since the early 40s.
And I'm restoring.
I'm a 75-year-old person with a hammer in my hand.
Anyway, go ahead.
The first exhibit is notice of zoning application meeting for the neighbors.
I made a copy of the letter we sent out to 83 neighbors.
That's the copy.
And I believe I have all the information that's required.
second document yes it's just a little slow okay that's the refusal level let's go to the third
document I'm sort of getting the hang of this after listening to all this that was the application
I'll take a real quick brief we got into this situation because we had used the
um the quick planning guide and i guess we didn't interpret it correctly dealing with side yard
clearance um but as it was explained to me and i fully accept the law is the law
and the guidance is just a reference so present
that's just a blueprint of the second floor we'll get to the one on the front
of the house ceiling and I can explain where the addition is going to be any
questions just press ahead here yeah that's that's okay
Okay, if you're looking at the house in the bottom right corner, the front elevation,
that's standing on Lizzie Street looking at the front of the house, that addition off
to the left, which is two windows on the roof and two at the bottom is the front view of
the addition.
It's about 13 feet in width.
And of course, the other photo on the bottom left hand is the addition looking at it from
east to west.
It's a long, very long, and it has the two dormers, front dorm and the back dormer.
This next one is just a blueprint of the first floor, we can roll through that I guess.
Picture the deed.
now if you notice on the deed and i'm not sure how to handle this again but it was my mother's
name and myself with survivalship uh she has passed away and because of that i put two support
documents with this one is the death certificate and one's a short certificate just to prove that
i am the sole winner i don't know that's needed or not but uh you don't have to that's the support
documents as far as the signs go I was waiting for a package from I guess the
board for the science and I never got so I went to the zoning code and I made up
my own signs and I post them within the time frame and this is the verbiage of
the signs I also published a schedule of the of the hearings there it is there so
that anybody had would have the websites and I highlighted our our hearing okay
we're gonna roll through that I guess okay I think I must be doing something right here nobody's
asked some questions there's a project form just describes what we're doing we're basically adding
it for additional living space it had a very small kitchen probably about 12 by 12 and a little bit
of a family room on the side there it's not that big of an addition and a side
yard is where the problem is and I can explain that if you can see what done
exactly yeah oh yeah because I didn't get the letter on time I had a copy of
their minutes and I just highlighted there they said it was no absolutely no
opposition to it at all but you now have the letter from the ROC so just go to
sign verification okay um i just you know i read somewhere that i needed to take multi-wide
pictures of the sign just to make sure it was posted for the right amount of time and
this is the posting from 9 27 it was one on 9 15 i took a photo and 9 23 so i believe i met that
requirement site plan yeah this probably gives you an idea if you look at the site plan in the
middle of the plan at the bottom is 531 you'll see the l-shaped addition you'll see a common
driveway which is 10 feet wide and then the house 535 on one side and 527 on the other
and we're looking at a six foot i think the paper says five but it's actually to count the thickness
of the wall it's a six foot separation from the center of the driveway over instead of the required
10 feet i believe for our ds3 projects neighbor on that side nobody had any objections so
that was a tax clearance form now i have some photos
to give you a pretty good reference you have to go there that other that email
okay yeah and you can you'll have to scroll through that okay p1 uh well all right hold
pin again yeah that's the front with a sign that was taken 915 kind that's a
view of the driveway in the house and of course the addition would be between
the driveway and the side of that on the left side of the house going
driveway and the side of the on the left side of the house going that's the back which said
where it was required that's the east side where the addition will be it'll cover those
bottom bottom five windows and extend a little bit out into the porch area
and somewhat back toward the truck go ahead and the sign again
that's the west side which nothing is being done with the reason we chose the east side was because
if we did anything on the west side we'd have the bay window that would interfere there's a sidewalk
that goes around to the back of the house and there's a back shed so the west was the only
practical side to do it on it asks for adjacent houses so i have 535 which is on the east side
it's in the driveway then of course my addition and then 531 and the next photo will show the
house on the west side the trees hide my house but I marked it 531 527 go ahead uh just the sign
again I couldn't get the verbiage into the camera very well because of the glare of the glass that's
on the side but anyway it's I have a copy of that that's a problem and they'd ask for interior shots
and we're renovating the house the interior probably would have to be gutted uh so it's
right now it's a mess there's another mess inside um what was that oh that was sign verification i
called it okay and uh just to show that there are eight houses roughly i think eight or seven houses
on livesey street um that are were built back in the in the 40s and at the time the requirements
were different and this is the house on the west side and you can see there's probably only about
three feet property separation on that side um so in those days it you know it wasn't the same as
it is today and i just thought i'd point that out okay that's the end of the photos and that's the
end of my presentation questions i was going to ask you to summarize but i'm so impressed with
your presentation for a man who's not a lawyer. I apologize to my other board members. I just
was listening and you hit everything right on target, I'll be honest with you.
He said he wasn't an attorney. I thought he was an attorney.
I know. It's never too late, Mr. Black. And your assistant, you would hire her, obviously,
all right um any questions from the board no
anyone else wish to testify in this matter if so please raise your hand
no hands chair thank you very much planning commission
good afternoon board peter bernard for the planning commission
This property is indicated for single family residential in the comprehensive plan. The
proposed addition does not leave sufficient side yard on the east side of the house. However,
the side yard on the west side plus the remainder on the east exceeds the minimum required total
side yard. Additionally, there is no opposition from the RCO or neighboring affected property.
Accordingly, we have no objection to the granting of the variance at this location.
we would suggest a proviso that an addition not be added to the west side of the property in the future.
Mrs. Sharon, you can't add the kind of proviso for the future.
They'd have to come back.
It would have to be considered at the time it's proposed.
They would have to come back.
Thank you.
MI-2020-001214-531-Libsey, is that the way you pronounce it?
Libsey, yes.
Libsey Street, my vote is yes.
My vote is yes.
My vote is yes.
Congratulations to the Black family.
I think I better get my law degree.
You better go get it.
Hurry up.
Take care.
Good luck to you.
Thank you, folks.
All right.
Good night, all.
Good night.
good night uh tanya sharon anybody we have any unfinished business it's a wrap chair yes thank
goodness all right thank you thank you everybody good job good night we got executive session
tomorrow morning yes yes all right o'clock okay see you then bye-bye good job frank