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