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.