Good morning, everyone. My name is Carol Tenere.
Carol?
Can we have one more minute? Oh, sorry.
This is Tanya. Can we wait three minutes, please?
Thank you, Kylie.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Good morning, Angela.
Good morning.
I'm here.
I have committed you to panelists and if you could stay unmuted the whole time as necessary
please just let us know when you need a quick break okay you got it thank you thank you very kindly
okay madam chair it appears to be at least 50 or more attendees we are ready to start whenever you
are okay i'm ready good morning everyone my name is carol tenary and today i'll be the chair of the
Zoning Board hearings. I'll be participating in today's hearing along with Board Secretary
Confessor Plaza and Board Members Thomas Holloman and James Snell. Our Board Administrator is Fatima
Al and Board Attorney is Sharon Saleta. 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 individuals participants prior to their testimony second we'd like to
advise everyone that this proceeding is being recorded and that by participating you acknowledge
your agreement to be recorded this is available to the public and on the web third for anyone
participating by phone if you wish to testify you must raise your hand by hitting star nine
then star 6 to unmute yourself. That is star 9 then star 6 to unmute yourself. To enter an
appearance statement, call 267-270-5548 and leave your email address and address of the property
at issue. And to repeat the number, it's 267-270-5548. Fourth, the question and answer
box is not for testimony. Any comments are to be directed to Ms. Tanya Sunkit or Ms. Fatina L.
Call out. I'm not calling out anything. Are there requests for continuances?
Um, Madam Chair, if we could first list out the cases that that are continued. Yes. Okay.
The continued cases are calendar number MI-2021-000787, 4918 Walnut Street.
That case is continued.
Calendar number MI-2021-000738, 638 North Peach Street is also continued.
Calendar number MI-2021-000866-6816 Jackson Street is continued.
Calendar number MI-2021-000788-6558 Van Dyke Street is withdrawn.
if there are any objections to what i've just called out please raise your hand
madam vice chair we have darlene treat i've unmuted her you may unmute yourself
mystery and please wait for the chair
mystery
Okay, she lowered her hand now. I'm not sure. Ms. Threatt. Good morning, Commissioner Darlene
Threatt. You did announce my continuance today, so I withdraw my request. Okay, thank
you all right I see no other hands madam chair okay is there anyone else who would like to
request a continuous if so please raise your hand and that also includes withdrawals
I see no hands madam chair
Okay. Calendar number MI 2020-00115-2504 East York Street. My vote is yes with revised plans consisting of one page.
Yes, Reproviso.
Yes, Reproviso.
Yes, Reproviso.
Calendar number MI2020-002483, 1431-33 North 20th Street.
Zen Zen is the attorney.
Madam Chair, Zen Jin has been promoted to panelists. He's coming back in now.
Thank you.
Good morning.
Good morning. Can you put your name and address on the record, please, and spell your last name?
Yes. Zen Jin, Z-H-E-N-J-I-N, 1617 John F. Kennedy Boulevard, Suite 1838, Philadelphia PA 19103. Here on behalf of the applicant.
Thank you. Do you swear or affirm to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
Do you also agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Have you emailed the exhibit packet with the required documents consisting of proof of ownership, tax compliance, refusal or referral, photos and or plans of the property five days in advance of this hearing?
And have you met with the RCO?
And do you have a letter?
Yes, to all questions.
Okay, you may proceed.
Thank you.
I'm going to...
I do want to state one thing.
The RCO, Sharswood Community Civic Association, has submitted a letter of non-opposition.
Yes, thank you.
I have a copy of that letter with my exhibits.
I am going to go ahead and share with the board the information relating to this case.
We have submitted to the board refusal, the non-opposition letter, photos, plans, tax
clearance, deed, appeal, the PIF, and the hearing notice.
With regard to the refusal itself, there are some changes based on our discussion with the community.
The property itself, we applied for a multifamily use with a daycare as the original proposal.
The community did not object so much to the multifamily.
However, they feel this particular building, which I will show in a minute with pictures, ultimately would not be the best to be used as a daycare.
My client has agreed to change the use of the commercial first floor proposal to a grocery store.
I'm not sure if the board can have that change made by provisal.
I'm sure Sharon can, maybe Ms. Suleta can let us know.
But that is what the RCO is looking for.
Mr. Jinn, that would require an amended application.
However, if it is what was presented to the community, the board could hold the vote pending receipt of the revised refusal from L&I.
Very good. Thank you.
What I'll do then is I will email Ms. Sunkit about the revised refusal and go ahead and obtain one.
In the meantime, let me continue with the application proposal.
So the reason this property is being proposed to be something other than what it is zoned district-wise, which is RSA 3, is because of the history of the property.
At one point, this building was granted for partial demolition and was used as a church.
What this building actually is, the photos will better show what we're trying to discuss here with regard to the building.
It's a double-width lot that is occupied by what used to be a church.
It's a double-width lot that is occupied by what used to be a church.
The building itself is in need of a lot of work, and my clients want to put in that work.
However, putting in the investment to revitalize this building also requires that some of the uses being proposed will not be consistent necessarily with the RSA3 zoning.
The community is aware that the area has a mix of different type of uses, including single-family RSA 3, but also includes, in addition, many buildings, including across the street, a big commercial building.
So it is not a block where it is purely RSA 3 residential.
Given the history of the church, the proposal for multifamily was not met with objection from the community.
The general proposal is to basically redo the interior, which is actually quite run
down and needs a lot of work.
The original proposal was changed to a grocery store with a new layout.
I'm going to zoom in so the board can clearly see proposal changes.
This is again a proposed layout that the community saw and is what we presented at the second
community meeting.
so they're aware that a grocery store design would approximate this particular look.
The residential above is based on basically some of the old wall layouts,
although most of the walls are dilapidated and would need to be replaced with drywall,
but the layout is generally what was residential setup and office setup above for the church.
so we're proposing three units residential above the and the commercial unit on the first floor
the residential unit have their own entrance the commercial entrance will be changed to fit more to
the neighborhood look and the front facade would be managed as well with a refreshing of the front
and a slight change to the look to make it more commercial in nature based on the above we received
ultimately a non-opposition from the community, although some of the votes were divided. But in
the end, the main objection initially was to the idea of a daycare at the location because the
community did not feel that would be a fitting use. Given the history of the property and its
unique size and structure, we would ask the board's favorable review in our request for variants for
the three-family dwelling as well as the changed use of the grocery store. I'm happy to answer
any questions or show again any exhibit that the board would like to see. Does the board have any
questions? No. No. Planning commission? Good morning, Chair Tanari. If this is going to be held
for a vote with a revised application,
then we would want to hold off
until that application is filed
before offering an opinion.
Thank you.
Excuse me, Mr. Haggerty.
We were only going to hold it
for receipt of the revised refusal
so that it could be referenced
in the decision.
We're planning to do a resumption hearing,
but if you're requesting one
so that you'd be able to consider it
with the new conditions,
then we should schedule something now.
Yes, we are.
Thank you.
Okay, thank you. Ms. Sunkit, could we schedule a resumption hearing limited to the Planning Commission entering its position based on the revised refusal?
Only that? Yes. Okay, yes. Could we swear him in as well?
Sure. Do you agree? Wait, sorry about that. Do you swear or affirm to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
And it's Ian Hegarty, H-E-G-A-R-T-Y for the Philadelphia City Planning Commission.
I'm so used to seeing your face that I think everybody knows who you are.
Sorry about that.
So, Mr. Zinjin, would 30 days be enough?
30 days should be enough for a revised refusal.
I will send a request for the letter authorizing us to go back to ONI as soon as possible.
Okay. What about August the 4th?
Let me take a look at my calendar, if the board could just bear with me one minute.
August the 4th would be a good date. Thank you.
sounds good so madam chair august 4th at 9 30 a resumption hearing just to provide
the testimony from planning commission thank you excuse me mr jane can i also ask that when you
receive the revised refusal could you send that and the revised application to mr hegarty for
his review as well absolutely thank you thank you everyone
Absolutely. Thank you. Thank you, everyone. Excuse me. Calendar number 0869-1622 South 12th Street. The owners are Alexander and Jessica Gottlieb.
Excuse me, Vice Chair, I'm sorry. We had Lorraine Gomez hanging up while y'all were discussing the previous case. What would you like for me to do?
Sharon.
Can we check if Mr. Jen is still here?
Mr. Jen?
No, he doesn't appear to be.
Go on to the next case.
I will try to contact him and see if he can sign on briefly just to get the additional
Witnesses' testimony on the record.
Calendar number 0869-1622, South 12th Street.
The owners are Alexander Gottlieb and Jessica Gottlieb.
We have a letter of non-opposition from Councilman Scuola.
And that letter refers to the East Passion Crossing letter in support.
Are the Gottlieb's here?
Yes, they are.
I've just promoted Mr. Gottlieb to panelists.
He's coming back in.
Mr. Gottlieb, you can unmute yourself.
And Mrs. Gottlieb has also been promoted to panelists as well.
madam chair we have to uh darwin here with their hand raised
for this case i'm not sure if he's here for this case or not he's not listed as the attorney on
this case do you want me to unmute him so he can speak um yes i unmuted him
good morning madam chair i i just wanted to confirm good morning one second name and address
on the record please and spell your last name first name darwin d-a-r-w-i-n last name bove b-e-a-u-v-a-i-s
i'm at 15 before you go there do you swear from to tell the whole truth and nothing about the
truth. So help me God, yes. So help me God, give me your address. 1500 Market Street, Suite 3500E,
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, 19102. I'm actually not interjecting for this particular case. I just
wanted to confirm a resumption case for 4306-8 Parkside Avenue, if that's still on the list. I
I didn't see it on the website, and I just wanted to confirm that we are listed for today.
That is on the list.
Go ahead, Ms. Sunkin.
I'm going to go into the Q&A, okay?
All right.
I'm going to ask that instead of interjecting in the hearings.
Thank you.
The God leaves here.
patina did you see them yes i promoted them to yes i promoted them to panelists twice
they're not unmuting themselves okay we also have mr jim back too so let me know what you like oh
I'm here. Okay. I just got into whatever you did helped. Oh, great. Okay. Can you put your name
and addresses on your names and address on the record and spell your last name? Sure. My name is
Alexander Gottlieb, 1622 South 12th Street, Philadelphia, PA, 19148. The last name is G-O-T-T-L-I-E-B.
and jessica yes i'm jessica gottlieb uh 1622 south 12th street philadelphia pennsylvania
19148 last name g-o-t-t-l-i-e-b do both of you swear or affirm to tell the whole truth and
nothing but the truth yes have you emailed the exhibit packet with proof of ownership
tax compliance a copy of the refusal or referral photos and or plans of the property
five days in advance of this hearing
and have you met with the RCO
and do you have a letter?
Yes, everything was sent in
and we do have a letter from the RCO.
And we do have one from Councilman Squilla
And we do have one from Councilman Squilla as well for non-opposition.
as well for non-opposition.
You may proceed.
So basically, as you just mentioned, we submitted the requested documents to the board for this
variance.
And the long and short of it is that we're seeking a variance for a third floor addition
to our two-story home with no eight-foot setback is what we're trying to accomplish
um do you do you want me to run through some of the documents that I had sent in uh I'll admit
this is my first time through this process so I'd like to see the plans okay let me uh see if I can
share my screen here um sorry just figuring out how to how to do that this is Pauline from IT if
hover along the bottom of the screen, you should see a green share screen with an arrow. There it
is, yep, hiding right in front of me. Okay. And then you choose the document that you want to share.
Gotcha. Okay, just let me don't mind my personal email here.
All right.
And you wanted to see the plans here.
You're witnessing my computer going very slowly.
So I apologize.
I'm sorry.
Do we have someone talking in the background?
I have somebody outside in the office next to me.
I can ask them to quiet down in one second.
Let me just pull these plans up for you.
Just talk, but I don't know if you can move all the way around and you don't want to show up.
A learning experience, like a preschool?
I'm like, franchise.
They're huge.
It's at the whole corner right here.
So what David needs is the whole building to stay alive.
To start to bring on everything that he created.
And he wants to report the object.
David, he can't .
He wants a full building to look like 100%.
And then he's already .
that's good okay anything else i can pull up for you here
do you need us to go through them
That would be helpful. Tom?
Go ahead, Al. Just go through them.
Sorry, you need to go through each of the documents is what you want to say.
Tom, what is it that you'd like to say?
site a site plan right so i just had that pulled up here
and just go through it al gotcha okay so um basically uh what you're seeing i guess uh
on the top of the plan are some of the existing pictures of the front of the property and then
it gives you a partial side elevation view as well as rear elevation and front elevation views here
on the bottom right and then on the bottom left here what you get is the aerial of the bird's eye
view that you can see the the roof deck and the rear yard and the front street there
that any other questions no that's good no no
No. Okay, is there anybody here who would like to testify on this case?
okay uh
I see no hands, Madam Chair. Okay, Planning Commission. Thank you Chair
Tenari, Ian Hegarty for the Philadelphia City Planning Commission. Members of the
board comprehensive plan recommends no change to the rsa 5 zoning at this location the proposed
dimensions on this plan do not conflict with the characteristics of the surrounding neighborhood as
there are several uh three-story properties already on this block the city planning commission
recommends that the board grant the variance thank you calendar number 0869 1622 south 12th street
my vote is yes my vote is yes my vote is yes my vote is yes good luck thank you calendar number
zero eight seven four sixteen eleven brandywine street the owners are ian fitzpatrick and elaine
fitzpatrick i'm sorry madam chair before we continue would it be allowable for zedgin to come forward
oh sure thank you kindly
um mr jen if you were online you heard that there was a another um there was a witness
who wished to testify if we could take that testimony now would that be okay with you
yes i'm fine with that thank you ms gomez has been unmuted ms gomez please unmute your
Ms. Gomez, can you hear me?
Hi, Ms. Gomez.
Yes, can you hear me?
Yes, I can hear you.
Can you put your name and address on the record, please, and spell your last name?
Yes, my name is Lorraine, L-O-R-R-A-I-N-E.
Last name is Gomez, G-O-M-E-Z.
Do you swear for her to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
And your address?
4243 Viola Street, 19104.
And your testimony is?
The testimony is the residents of East Parkside feel as though that location and the density
that is proposed to be put there is too much.
We've worked hard to have our community zoned as a single family residence home and to put
that amount of people in that space is just too many.
We were hoping to come up with some type of compromise that would be beneficial to both.
And at this time, we haven't.
But the community is definitely opposed to the project.
Were you present at the RCO meeting, the two RCO meetings that we had with the coordinating RCO?
Okay, so we had, I understand there were some votes in opposition, but also we had people in support, I thought we had discussed the density issue.
This is a double width lot, which is part of the reason why we're asking for, even if you build two single family houses, they would be substantial in size and in density as far as bedrooms.
the three units total bedrooms are actually no greater than what two single family are say three
houses would uh entail and this is an existing structure we're not looking to demolish it i
think that's part of the reason we're asking for this particular setup okay we're talking about
two different addresses here okay what i'm talking about is 4306 parkside but there is no structure
yeah wrong address right okay oh okay then i think that would be it for me that's correct
in 30 days august 4th at 9 30 you'll be back thank you thank you mr james i apologize for the error
no problem thank you miss saletta
calendar number 0874 1611 brandywine street
The Fitzpatricks are the owners.
We have a letter of support from the Spring Garden Civic Association.
Madam Chair, the only hand that is up is Joyce Smith.
I'd like to hear from her.
Oh, there goes Elaine Fitzpatrick also.
So you want me to do Joyce Smith first?
No, Fitzpatrick.
Sounds good.
Thank you.
you're welcome she's coming in as a panelist
hello hello hello um fitzpatrick's can you put your name and address on the record please
and spell your last name ian fitzpatrick 1611 brandy wine street philadelphia pa
F-I-T-Z P-A-T-R-I-C-K Elaine Fitzpatrick, 1611 Brandywine Street, Philadelphia, P-A-T-R-I-C-K
It's the accent.
Okay, it's cool.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
Yes, we do.
Have you emailed the exhibit packet with proof of ownership, tax compliance, a copy of the refusal or referral, photos and or plans of the property five days in advance of this hearing, and have you met with the RCO, and do you have a letter?
Yes, we have all of that, yes.
We actually do have the letter of support from the Spring Garden Civic Association, so you may proceed.
So, here are the plans. Would you like us just to talk through the ideas behind it?
Okay. So, like many people spent the last year or so working in sort of makeshift settings
in the home, which is, you know, I don't know what any of us can predict what the future
of work will look like but i'm sure we'll be working more from home going forward so the plan
is to extend the existing pilot house to create a small office to attach to it and a powder room
and a powder room yes so that'd be on the fourth floor
and we're just moving the deck where the extension will be just to the front of the
the extension and that's really it okay what does the rest of the block look like
okay you want to get the photographs
tom do you have any questions
will there be revised plans submitted
um for well i think they are the plans um we have the deck further out and the spring gardener civic
association asked us to bring it back five feet which i believe my architect has changed the plans
and the um the civic association has agreed with that yeah the the civic association gave us
approval based on the revised plans so these excuse me this this is sharon we do have the
revised plans and the proviso plans form the only change is the location of the deck so if you should
approve this it should be with revised plans one page thank you okay i'm going to go to planning
commission but wait wait a minute ian is there anyone else here who would like to testify
if there is please raise your virtual hand
i see no hands madam chair okay planning commission
good morning chair tanara ian hegarty for the philadelphia city planning commission
members of the board comprehensive plan recommends no change to the existing rm1 zoning at this
location we don't object to the extent of the roof deck which we believe is consistent with
adjacent properties and doesn't conflict with the characteristics of the surrounding neighborhood.
However, the height requirements of the RM1 zoning district do not impose a financial burden on the
applicant and so we don't feel that hardship has been established requiring them to violate the
height limit and so City Planning Commission recommends that the board deny the variance for
the building height. Thank you. Calendar number 0874-1611 Brandywine Street. My vote is yes with
revised plans consisting of one page. Yes with proviso. Yes with proviso. Calendar number 2622-1713
Calendar number 2622, 1713 South Street.
South Street.
The applicant, I believe, is Pincus Jakobovitz.
There are no exhibits.
In this case, it's the second listing.
It's the applicant here.
i have wade albert
i can okay no he's not the applicant no okay no i don't see any other hands
okay calendar number 2622 1713 south street this case is dismissed
Dismissed.
Dismissed.
Dismissed.
Calendar number 0781-2609 East Allegheny Avenue.
The attorney is Sean Ward.
Mr. Ward is coming back in as a panelist.
mr ward good morning madam chair members of the board sean ward on behalf of the applicant
my address is 331 east street road trevos pa 19053 do you swear or firm to tell the whole truth and
nothing about the truth? I most certainly don't. Do you agree to wait the reading of the refusal
and stipulate to its accuracy? Yes. And have you emailed the exhibit packet with proof of ownership,
tax compliance, refusal, referral, photos, plans, five days in advance of this hearing? And have
you met with the RCO? And do you have a letter? And as I asked that question, we do have a letter
in support from PROPAC and a letter of non-opposition from Councilman Sculler. So now
you can respond. That is correct, and yes, I do have those letters as indicated. Okay, you may
proceed. Thank you, Madam Chair. Before I start speaking, can everybody see my screen? Yes. Okay,
very good. This is a pretty straightforward case. I submitted my exhibit packet, which includes
A1 is the notice of refusal. It's a permit for a vacant commercial first floor and two
apartments, one each at the second and third floor in a CMX1 district. Under CMX1 regulations,
the residential use is limited to that of the most restrictive residential district on the block,
which in our case is RSA 5 which does not permit two-family dwellings so we seek a variance for
the two-family use. A2 is the ZBA application of appeal. A3 the project information form. A4 is
proof of ownership copy of the deed. A5 is proof of tax clearance. A6 are typical floor plans of
the property for the second and third floors since the first floor commercial vacant commercial is
permitted by right a7 photographs of the subject property and some street views uh separate from
the packet which i do have is a8 is the rco letter of support from propac as mentioned and a9 is
councilman squill's letter of non-opposition as far as that relevant zoning history for this
property none was found however i would point out that the entire 2600 block uh is basically mixed
use. The highlighted one, 2603, is my client's property, another property he owns on that block,
and that is currently used as a hair salon with two apartments. We took that to the board
several years ago for a variance to legalize those two apartments as well.
But you'll see that 2601, dental office with two apartments, 2605, doctor's office, two apartments.
The most concentrated one is 2617, which is a laundromat and eight dwelling units.
And then on the next block up, it's still a 2600 block, but there's a small street separating these properties.
You can see most of these are one apartments with the commercial use, but these are all two-story buildings.
And these are all three-story buildings, 2601 through 17.
A12 is a zoning map.
A13 is the aerial photograph.
my client purchased this property in march of 2020 it was occupied as a first floor commercial
and and two apartments above when he applied for his rental license it was denied for lack
for lack of a zoning permit so when we look to find the permit on file there was none so that's
of a zoning permit so when we look to find the permit on file there was none
why we are here today so briefly we have the application of appeal notice of refusal project
information form is deed proof of tax clearance the floor plans you'll see they both have living
rooms towards the front bedrooms towards the back and rear on the side so
again here's the property right and right pretty much center of the block
there's a whiteout shot you'll see they're all mostly commercial uses on the first floor
two stories above most of which have apartments and then i have attached to the packet all the
zoning permits i don't really think you want me to go through all those but they are attached to
packet. Again it's CMX1 attached to RSA5 so therefore the RSA5 regulations apply to the
residential use. And again here's an aerial photo just showing that the property to the west is
Campbell Square and Nativity BVM. These are the two blocks in question and then to the right is
at St. Adalbert's Church. And across the street are similar uses. So I'm sorry, here is a copy
of the Propact letter, which was sent to the board, and Councilman Squill's letter, which was also
sent to the board. Mr. Shira and his wife are currently in Albania. So as an officer of the
court, I would represent that if they were present, they would verify my representations
is true and correct and adopt them as their own testament and that's all i have okay thank you
is there anyone in the virtual audience who would like to speak
i see no hands madam chair okay planning commission thank you chair tanari ian hegarty
for the philadelphia city planning commission members of the board the comprehensive plan
recommends a zoning map change to cmx2 at this location therefore the variance use conforms to
the proposed zoning district in the comprehensive plan and the city planning commission recommends
that the board grant the variance thank you calendar does the board have any questions no
no no calendar number 0781 2609 east allegheny avenue my vote is yes my vote is yes my vote is
yes my vote is yes thank you very much madam chair i'll see you guys uh at two o'clock today
Thank you. Thank you. Calendar number 0743-3220-Rett-Rood. The attorney is John Sabatina.
Attorney McDermott has come back in as a panelist.
okay is he in place of mr sabatina yes okay mr mcdermott unmute yourself please to be sworn in
yeah this is mr mcdermott mr sabatina is present we're just using mike writer
okay i see him um can you put your name and address on the record and spell your last name please
john sabatina s-a-b-a-t-i-n-a
Your address, please.
Address.
My address, 1742 Emerson Street.
Do you swear a firm to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
Thank you.
Do you also agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Have you submitted the exhibit packet with proof of ownership tax compliance,
copy of the refusal or referral photos under plans of the property five days in advance of
this hearing and have you met with the rco and do you have a letter yes yes yes i would also like to
i don't have the letter yet do we have it well i would also like to mention that uh there are
two rcos that oppose this um and we also have heard from councilman o'neill
He submitted a letter saying that he strongly opposes this.
So you may proceed.
Yes, as I stated before, my name is John Sabatina, and I'm representing Alex Dahashi and Helena.
Alex Dahashi and Helena Novakova,
who are the owners of this property.
They simply wish to establish
a two-family living unit in this property,
one unit on the ground floor,
consisting of one-bedroom apartment,
and on the second floor is two-bedroom apartment.
As you can see before you is a list of our exhibits.
Notice of refusal, project information for the 3220 Rett Road, the deed,
certificate of tax compliance
and exterior photographs of the property showing the posting
interior photographs
Zoning map showing the zoning in the area.
Aerial view.
Showing the location of the property.
Also, there is a map showing the other two family dwellings in the area.
And the notification letter to the RCO.
And the notification letter to the Office of Councilman Brian O'Neill.
Community meeting letter and last certificate of mailings I realize that there is a great
deal of opposition here but i also wish to point out that there are quite a number of properties
in the area that have done exactly this they have closed up the garage and are utilizing
the garage area as a living space illegally and we simply my client simply tried to make
his property legal
and that's what
the situation is
Is there a parking pad in front of that
Yes there is
I have a question
Counselor
Is the work done yet
front of the
garage is closed up
And the interior work been completed
it? I believe so. Thank you. Okay, does anybody on the board have questions? No. Is there
anybody in the virtual audience who would like to testify? One other fact I'd like to
point out is directly across from this whole development, it's zone multifamily. So it's not
a problem with the area. There's quite a number of multifamily right across Comley Road.
this work was done without a permit i'm not aware if they got permits or not
madam chair we have the applicant helena please unmute yourself you're free to speak
uh hi uh my name is helena and i'm the owner um i'm not sure if you can see me but um i just
wanted to say i'm sorry can you spell your first wait one second thanks confessor go ahead
okay my name is halina novikova it's h-a-l-y
Okay, my name is Halina Novikova. It's H-A-L-Y-N-A, and the last name is N-O-V-Y-K-O-V-A.
And your address, please?
The address is 4440 Master Avenue, Feasterville, 3-Voice, PA-19053.
So you don't live on Red Road?
No, currently not.
Happy New Swing.
Okay, do you swear for him to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
Okay, you may proceed.
So I just wanted to tell that we wanted to make it for the future just in case we're going to need it to expand.
But to be honest, I just recently drove past the street and on the same street, there is at least four other houses like that.
so uh you know um i i don't really see the problem it's a big house that could be divided i guess but
um i guess that's it okay thank you thank you planning commission
i'm sorry mr haggerty before you proceed we do have another hand up it is councilman onel
oh okay i didn't realize he was here yes i'm sorry he's been unmuted sir please unmute yourself
you're free to speak thank you i councilman can you put your name uh on the record please
and spell your last name brian o'neill representing the 10th district which includes this property
on that road okay do you swear for him to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth
Yes, I do.
Okay, you may proceed.
I'm very familiar with this street.
It's a sort of crescent-shaped half-moon street coming off of a busy street,
calmly, backs up to a wooded area where there's a creek
and it's owned by the water department.
So I've had a lot of issues over the years with trees that are in people's yards
and all that.
So I know both Rhett as it comes in one side and Abby as it comes in the other.
To give you some perspective, these are very small units, generally called row ranchers.
There's several hundred of them spotted throughout this vicinity that were built back in the 70s
when there was options besides the full three-story row homes.
And mostly they're older couples, sometimes younger families or younger couples who live there until they're ready to raise a family.
They're very small.
And the garage issue, while it's illegal, wouldn't have us here today.
A lot of houses have done that.
Some legally, many not legally.
this is all about an illegal duplex. It was rented to two families. The neighbors contacted
my office because it's a very small street and people know each other. Ellen and I went out and
shut it down earlier this year or late last year, which is why we're here today legalizing something
that was not only done on the exterior, but it was turned into an apartment. It's since been
brought back since Ellen and I went out there in this application. It's just one tenant is in there.
And I want to clarify, there probably are about 300 of these scattered in the area between
Knightson Academy and Woodhaven and Morell Avenue. There's never been one that has been converted.
This would be the first duplex that was ever converted and legalized. There are duplexes
on Conley Road, right behind this little section of Rhett Road and Abbey that both, you know,
come in and come out of Conley. But they are end-of-the-row duplexes that were built that way,
where there are row homes in a long row, and then the end has a two-story duplex.
A lot of neighborhoods were built that way with the way it was planned out.
with with the um uh the way it was planned out but they those those are original construction
duplexes that were sold as duplexes originally there may be two of them on comley road and then
the rm2 across comley road is a quiet condominium single family development that has been there
maybe even since the 60s but certainly since the since the 70s and you don't even know it's there
I used to live right down the street I still live in the area but not on the on the same street
very familiar with it and that is kind of an irrelevant multi-family development one is it's
it's a it's a condominium development uh and and two uh it was built that way that's a that's an
as-built uh uh project so this is really egregious and uh having already been uh uh you know
operating illegally uh not only the the front of the house with the garage uh enclosure but
but an actual duplex by a non-resident who bought this just in the last few years and, you know,
set it up as a rental property. That is very, very okay, legal, done a lot. There are landlords
all over the city that do that. But to turn it into a two-family on a single-family street
is, I just couldn't object more to this, to this application. And I thank you for your
consideration. And I thank you for your testimony. Does anyone else have questions?
I see no hands, Madam Chair. Thank you. Ian, Planning Commission.
Thank you, Chair Tanari. Ian Hegarty for the Philadelphia City Planning Commission.
Members of the board, the comprehensive plan recommends no change to the existing RSA-4
single-family zoning at this location. The applicant just hasn't made an effort to establish
a hardship with evidence of unique physical circumstances or conditions of the property.
Just note that neither adjacent non-conforming uses nor nearby zoning districts constitute
to hardship city planning commission recommends that the board deny the variance thank you
calendar number zero seven four three thirty two twenty red road my vote is no my voters no my voters
no my voters no calendar number zero seven eight zero three sixty four or dash sixty eight church
Lane. The attorney is Alan Nockamson.
Mr. Nockamson has been promoted to panelists. He's coming back in.
Good morning.
Mr. Nockamson, good morning. Can you put your name and address on the record, please, and spell your last name?
Sure. Allen Nockamson, N-N-C-O-C-H-U-M-S-O-N, address 123 South Broad Street, Suite 1600, Philadelphia, PA, 19109.
do you swear to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth i do do you agree to waive the
reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy i do and have you emailed the exhibit
packet with proof of ownership tax compliance refusal or referral photos under plans of the
property five days in advance of this hearing and have you met with the rco and do you have a letter
yes in all respects okay you may proceed we do have two rcos opposing this penn area neighborhood
Association and Faith Community Development Corporation. Okay. I only received a letter
from the coordinating the RCO Penn area, so I don't have knowledge of the second letter.
Okay. May I share my screen? Sure you may. All right. So I'm here today to present 364R-68
Church Lane. As you can see from the front page of my materials, this is a property,
you know, with the arc, you would expect, is located in the rear of, you know, of different properties along Church Lane.
different properties along Church Lane. So even though it's Church Lane, if you look at Church
Lane here, you actually have to go down Nash, and that property, which is almost a 10,000 square
foot property, is tucked in the rear way away from any of the residential properties
that are surrounding it. So what you'll see in my table of contents is a deed to the property,
certificate of tax clearance, notice of refusal, the application for appeal, maps of the area,
photographs of the property, a simple drawing showing the current building structure,
and the only correspondence that I have is from the Penn Area Neighborhood Association.
So a little bit of background, this property, we haven't changed it in any way physically.
You'll see from the pictures, there are garage bays there.
The previous use of this property, and we actually got a lot of background and history about this property from the neighbor who attended the community meeting.
And in the 70s, this was owned by a lawn mowing company where they repaired, stored, and maintained lawn mowing equipment.
similar to what we're trying to do in terms of personal vehicle repair and maintenance.
Here, we're just using automobiles.
But anyway, the property has been that way, hasn't changed in over 50 years.
Unfortunately, it's gone through hard times in terms of financial ownership.
My client, Tanya Gore, purchased this property at a tax sale, which is the deed to the property, a few years ago.
And here shows that she is, unlike the previous owner, in good standing with the City of Philadelphia in terms of her tax obligations.
So this is an RSA 3 property, but really an RSA 3 property in name only.
You'll see from the aerial views, the pictures, this would show no residential use at all.
In actuality, it shows what we're proposing is similar to, you know, what it has been envisioned for 50 years and its previous use in 50 years.
So what we're trying to do is for use as a personal vehicle repair and maintenance in an existing structure.
We're not changing any of the physical structure except the office, which will obviously modernize.
So here's our application for appeal to the ZVA, one of our project information form.
And then again, just to reiterate, this is, again, a map of the vicinity within Church Lane.
Even though we have a Church Lane address in the rear, we really have to go down the long strip of street of Nash Lane, where our property is tucked way beyond any other residential properties.
What is this going to be used for? For simply garaging vehicles or for a repair shop?
It's really a repair shop. So my client, Tanya Gore, is on the line. She doesn't plan to do major repairs. Really, in essence, this is an emission shop for inspections and then minor repairs for people to get their registration every single year.
and we're willing to agree to reasonable provisos in that respect and we can go through that too
but here is a picture of what the property looks like this is pre-existing this has been there for
over 50 years nothing has changed in terms of physical structure and again here's just showing
how we are and we're nowhere near any of the residential usage and then again we just created
a simple you know floor plan but you can see there are bays here and then there's an office right
there. And then we did meet with the Penn Area Neighborhood Association. I would say it was a
very lively meeting. It was a very difficult meeting to present. I don't know if the representative
from Penn Area Neighborhood Association is here or even Inez Love of the other RCO, but they would
say that it was really difficult to present this matter. Like, you know, there was difficulty even
just going through the materials. Basically, I had one person during the entire meeting
just saying can we just vote can we just vote um and we did that for over an hour um but again
we did learn a lot about the neighborhood in terms of admittedly 50 years 50 years ago this
was used by a lawn mowing company for repair maintenance and storage of lawn mowing equipment
uh similar you know to the type of usage you know conceptually of you know automobiles so uh
A couple of things that they put in there, they said they would support, there was one proviso, support the project only if used to garage vehicles, not for use as emissions or repair shop.
Again, I think, you know, again, the only one person voted for that proviso. But, you know, we really try to give reasonable provisos for this project. We don't want to be a nuisance to this neighborhood. Tanya's, Ms. Gore's father, the reason why Ms. Gore knew of this property is her father used to store his materials and vehicles in this area.
Again, I think, you know, again, the only one person voted for that proviso.
but you know we
So they knew of the existence of this property, and they do not want to be a nuisance.
During the community meeting, it was acknowledged of how Ms. Gore has properly maintained the grounds, which were overgrown weeds and trees that were falling down.
And over the last two or three years, she's really maintained the property very well.
So she doesn't want to be a nuisance in the neighborhood.
She wants to agree to reasonable provisos.
And these are some of the things they would like to agree to in terms of provisos.
What is it being used for now?
To garage vehicles?
It's just, there's nothing.
I mean, right now it's an RSA3 property.
They're storing some of their materials and equipment right now, but it's right now not being used as anything.
We're trying to legally change it so we can make this into a personal vehicle repair and maintenance shop.
You know, some of the provisos we agreed to is to limit that use because that was a concern in the neighborhood. Well, Ms. Gore may be a great person and do the right thing, but this runs with the land, which we acknowledged. And that's why we want to, like, limit the usage for Ms. Gore's particular usage.
So we would, you know, in a form of proviso, make this into an inspection and emission shop with related repairs in connection therewith.
Our hours of operation are only Monday through Friday, 9 to 4 p.m.
We would agree to that in a form of a proviso.
There was concern here, although it's kind of weird, like with the proviso talking about garaging vehicles,
their concern, too, was that we were just going to store a ton of vehicles on this property.
And it was going to look junky.
So we would agree to a proviso where no vehicles will be permanently stored on the premises.
So, you know, you're going to have customers come and, you know, there may be a busy day where they all don't fit into the bays, where they're going to be stored temporarily in front of the bays while the work is getting done.
But we're not going to permanently store vehicles.
This is not a vehicular storage facility.
So that's a proviso we would agree to it.
And that would make it a repair shop.
Go ahead, Tom.
Excuse me, counselor.
Do you have documentation from zoning on what the existing use of the property is?
No, I actually looked on Atlas.
There was really nothing on Atlas that showed anything in terms of a previous history.
So, again, through our discovery, through the community meeting process, that's where I'm getting the fact about the lawn mowing company, because the person who's 364 Church Lane, who's right in front of us on Church Lane, is the one who indicated that.
And I think there was an acknowledgement because there's a lot of residents who have a history in this neighborhood who acknowledge that that was the case.
So there's never been a residential use, legal residential use on this property.
So, again, we're not trying to convert something that has a residential history at all.
You know, it's just something that hasn't happened on this property.
And it did fall in financial disrepair because Ms. Gore is the one who purchased this property at a tax sale.
And she's maintained it physically and financially during that period of time.
um and then the question some of the unfavorable comments was there was concerns over cars being
parked in the general area this is a 10,000 square foot lot even if we park this thing up
there's not gonna be enough business to like you know people are not going to park on the street
our property is tucked in the rear along Nash and so we will not have no one would park their cars
in the general facility in the neighborhood of Church Lane.
So that was an issue.
So that's basically our presentation in a nutshell.
Here you'll see our proof of mail.
Excuse me, Counselor.
How will the people know that the service is in the rear?
Well, that's a good question.
Through advertising and word of mouth,
Ms. Gore's family has been in the business for some time.
Her father has been in the business and, you know, she would be affiliated with Ms. Gore as well.
So it's really a low key operation and he has a decent following in the neighborhood.
Like I said, he has stored things over the course of time when the previous owner owned the property.
Like I said, he is, you know, he has stored things over the course of time when.
So he's very familiar with this property and he feels comfortable that business will find him.
And I think there is a need in the neighborhood because there is not such a facility anywhere nearby.
So they don't want to be a nuisance.
They want to reasonably use this property.
And like I said, this property has been this way for over 50 years.
And no one in its history has ever attempted a residential use for this property.
Is there anyone here in the virtual audience who would like to testify?
Adam, Chair, we have Charles Richardson.
He's been unmuted.
Please unmute yourself, Mr. Richardson.
Mr. Richardson?
Mr. Richardson, okay.
Now it just popped up to unmute myself.
Good morning.
Hi, Mr. Richardson.
Can you put your name on the record, please?
And then I'll swear you in.
Charles Richardson from the Office of Councilwoman Cindy Bass, room 312, City Hall.
Do you swear if I'm to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
Thank you. You may proceed.
I'm sorry about that.
The councilwoman is opposed to the granting of this variance.
The RCO did hold a community meeting on June the 16th, where the vote was 18 to 1,
uh as you could as you well see on the um on the screen of mr knockamson uh these were folks that
12 of them were actual near neighbors who are opposed to that uh the uh the fact that it was
a lawnmower equipment storage and repair place uh is very uh minimal with regard to it when you
compare it to uh auto repair place that you know with somebody who already has a business
that's going on elsewhere and you know can possibly have a lot of business that would be
following them to that location. Vehicle repair is prohibited in the RSA3 area and we don't think
that there's any way that they would be able to guarantee that the that there would be any
any effect on the note not be any effect on the folks that live in the in the near neighborhood
Despite the fact that there is so much ground space or the appearance of ground space,
that happens all over the community. We have some here right near our district office
where they filled up their parking space and they're parking now out on the streets.
So we really don't have any confidence that that would not have an effect on the community
as well. So the Councilwoman is opposed. Thank you. Are there any other questions?
So the other thing is I would like to have my client adopt my testimony and give some more information about this project, if you don't mind.
I'm sorry.
Yes, Tanya.
I'm just sorry that there are other people who wish to testify, just so you're aware.
Okay. Can you please raise your hand?
Madam Chair, we have Theresa Buda.
Please unmute yourself.
Ms. Buda, please unmute yourself and wait for the vice chair.
Sorry about that.
Can you put your name and address on the record and spell your last name and then I'll swear
you in? Okay. Teresa Buda, B-U-D-A, and 373 East Church Lane. Okay. Do you swear or affirm to tell
the whole truth and nothing but the truth? I do. Thank you. You may proceed. So I just wanted to
say that the community is strongly opposed and that Mr. Nockamson's... Are you speaking on behalf
of yourself or are you speaking as the chair of your community? I'm speaking on behalf of myself.
Okay, so I think that the lot has been misrepresented. It is not down along
street. It's no more, it's closer to the street than many of the houses that are on the street and
street and um also the uh it was a very selective um uh reiteration of the community meeting that
also the
was presented by him okay so you're by mr richardson so you're opposed to this absolutely
okay thank you is there anyone else who would like to testify please raise your hand
yes madam chair we have a calling user phone number ending in 1331 please unmute yourself and
wait for the chair okay we have a calling user it appears that the number is 883 you can unmute
and wait to be sworn in hello can you hear me
call in user 883 please unmute yourself
okay can we move on to the next person who would like to testify they're available that's the last
one um uh so madam vice chair uh just to address the previous um comments um i have the site plan
on there and as you can see we are tucked in the rear and we are in on nash uh away from uh the
residential usage that would be on church as well as Bellevue Bellefield Avenue as far as
my selective presentation again this is the information I received from the community
regarding the lawn more company my client is on the line Tanya Gore so I do see her on the line
and she would like to testify okay Ms. Gore please unmute yourself and please wait for the chair
miss gore can you hear me yes hi put your name and address on the record please and then i'll
swear you in sure it's tanya t-y-n-i-a last name is gore g-o-r-e address 364 rare through 368
church lane do you swear for him to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth
Yes. Okay, you may proceed.
Okay, good morning. So I've purchased this property a few years back. My father actually
used to rent from the gentleman who lost the property, as Alan explained. At that time,
we decided this would be a good opportunity to try to clean the property up and actually open
the business because it's a very large property back there. As Alan stated, there is actually
the owner who is now deceased, who I purchased a property from, he owned both sides of the
property. So when you go up Nash Lane, you have a left side and the right side. I own the right,
I'm sorry, left side of the property. The right side of the property has a new owner, which since the old owner has passed away, the family sold it to someone else.
So when you go up this Nash Lane, which sits off of Church Lane, we are nowhere near Church Lane.
um you have to go up in the street up in the driveway um i don't want people to get confused
as to what is my business and what the other person is doing which that address is not even
nash lane it's like belfield avenue or something like that um our purpose of buying the property
since we've owned the property we have put new garage doors back there we've cleared the trash
out of there. The amount of vehicles that used to be stored back there are gone. My father has since
tried to get, along with my daughter's father, Albert Feaster, have tried to get the property
in use for an emission station, not a purpose of a mechanic shop. Okay, yes, when you come to get
emissions on your car, it may fail because of whatever reasons. If it's something that we can
do that is a simple job to repair the person's vehicle, to get it to pass emissions, then
to repair the person's vehicle, to get it to pass emissions, that's what we will be doing.
We will not be holding the type of mechanic shop where we're going to be pulling engines and
Cadillac converters and all that other type of stuff that goes on at a regular
auto mechanic shop. That's not the type of business that we're trying to run.
I also don't know if people know that when you are having an admission shop, this is ran through the state.
So the state troopers actually have to come in and they have to approve our building.
And they are the one that supplies the machines and everything.
So this isn't like some type of mom and pop shop that we're trying to run.
This is a legit admission station that we are trying to run.
As far as the community, I'd like, can I interrupt you? There were two RCO meetings. Did you attend any of them?
Both. I'm sorry, I think we only, I think we only had one RCO meeting.
Yeah, Madam Vice Chair, there was an initial RCO meeting scheduled with another organization.
Midstream, the coordinating RCO was changed.
So me and Mr. Richardson for the initial RCO meeting apologized to the individuals who did attend
and stated that another meeting would happen, which that meeting did occur.
And that's the basis of the letters.
I only have one of them that's in front of you.
So yes, Ms. Gore was at the community meeting.
and that would be an area neighborhood i'm sorry excuse me this is sharon um mr knockamson we have
one meeting summary form it identifies two rcos that participate there were not two letters
okay okay gotcha i thought there were two letters right okay and are you are you tanya are you aware
of the councilwoman also being opposed to this? Um, no, I wasn't aware of that. She's also opposed
to it. Okay. So you may continue. Okay. So, um, the other issues that I have, um, are, um, I feel
like there has been people that have been, neighbors, um, that have been opposed to my
project because they have also, they've literally told me, I'm going to oppose to your property
becoming a business, but I'm willing to purchase your property. Well, that says a lot right there.
What we do there, which is not any business going on right now because we're not zoned to
do anything so there's nothing going on as of right now um whatever we're doing up and i really
wish you could see how far we sit back from the street it does not they cannot hear back there
they cannot see back there there has never in the history of about 20 years that my father
was renting a space back there prior to us buying the property. Has there ever been an overflow of
cars on the street of Church Lane? There's no need for us to use Church Lane at all. We just
have too much property. We won't even have that much. I can't foresee that much business going on
every single day, whereas though the overflow would go in the street. We have maintained this
property. We have put thousands and thousands of dollars into this property to try to fix it up
and get it prepared to make it in the mission station. I don't know if the neighbors know that
this building was actually rat infested and i mean rat infested so we had to do you know a lot
of patching on the inside of the cement and stuff like there is a lot of money that we have put in
to this project and it's just kind of hurtful that i feel like people are trying to shoot us
down for their own benefit um the community okay well i'd like to interrupt you again um
the rcos and the councilwoman are opposed to this being used for emissions or a repair shop
okay i don't do you have anything else do you have anything else to add to that because i'm
going to go on to see if there is another witness um no i mean i don't no i don't i don't exactly
know why they're opposed to it um the only thing that i can say is if the community was to um was
opposed to it um when the property was up for sale because my understanding is they would like to see
it for community parking um why didn't at that time when the property was up for sale didn't
didn't they purchase the property
they purchase the property to have it i don't know that's not that's
to have it be
I don't know that's not that's not
zoning to respond to
but I thank you
for your testimony
does the board have any questions
planning commission
uh thank you chair tenari um p.n hegarty for the philadelphia city planning commission
comprehensive plan recommends no change to the existing rsa3 zoning at this location
i'll just note that the property has been zoned for residential use since 1978.
the existing structure on the lot is non-residential construction so we agree
that some relief is justified. However, the proposed motor vehicle repair use, regardless
of the current owner's plans, is a use that's likely to substantially injure the appropriate
use of adjacent conforming property. And it conflicts with the expectation implicit in
the residential zoning district, which has been in place for over 40 years, well before
the applicant bought this property, that this area will transition to residential use. And
And so, therefore, the City Planning Commission recommends that the Board deny the variance.
Thank you.
Calendar number 0780364R-68 Church Lane, my vote is no.
My vote is no.
My vote is no.
My vote is no.
Thank you.
Madam Chair, this is Sharon.
If you could next see if Mr. Dean is here, go back to number six.
if he's present his case could be heard before the add-on calendar number zero zero five eight
three zero two one amber street the attorney is christopher dean
i don't see him listening oh wow okay he sent me a text a few minutes ago saying he would be
signing on any minute.
Can we try just one more time
to call? Is Christopher
Dean somewhere out there in virtual
land? Well, I'm on your number.
He's not on the list.
Okay. Okay.
Proceed with the next
one. Thank you.
Do we leave this open or continue it?
No, you can hear him after
the add-on. Okay, great. Calendar number 0137-4306 Parkside Avenue.
Madam Chair, I just promoted the Darwin to panelists.
okay good morning madam chair good morning name and address please and then i'll swear you in
sure first name darwin d-a-r-w-i-n last name beauvais
C-A-U-V, as in victory, A-I-S, as in Sam.
I'm located at 1500 Market Street, Suite 3500E.
That's in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, 19102.
Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal, stipulate to its accuracy?
Yes, I believe this is a resumption hearing.
And do you also swear or affirm to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
so help me god i do okay and excuse me this is sharon if we could also um promote attorney
yvonne haskins who has asked to participate and has submitted exhibits okay and this hearing is
to hear additional testimony from the rco and the council person yes and what i was the community
and the community and what i was hoping um because i do believe miss haskins has yet to
even present a case uh because she was hired after the last uh after this matter was continued
so i just want to orient the board then we can give it to miss haskins and then i would just
like time to for rebuttal um excuse me miss haskins could you please raise your hand
and this is Sharon if I can add one more thing I believe Councilwoman Gauthier is going to appear
to testify and I I just ask that that um we we get the final say before we close the record um
we get the final say before we close the record.
While Ms. Haskins is being promoted,
I just want to remind the board
that we appeared before you on May 5th
and it was continued with explicit instructions
for the applicant and the community
to sit down and come up with a compromise.
uh after that my my client did make calls and made overtures and there was none none of these
overtures took place and i in fact seven weeks went by before he received a phone call and at
that time he received a phone call from miss haskins who identified herself as representing
the community and but by that time there was already uh uh how could i describe it
there was already a protest being mounted against the project and if i
if if if i can share my screen and show you what i have found
Facebook post by Ms. Haskins. Okay, wait one second, Darwin. I want to
swear Ms. Haskins in. Okay. Yvonne, can you put your name and address on the record, please?
And you have to unmute yourself.
Unmuted. Okay. Yvonne B. Haskins.
70, you need my address. H-A-S-K-I-N-S.
My address is 7035 McCallum Street, Philadelphia, 19119.
And do you swear I'm firm to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
Who are you representing?
I'm representing.
I'm sorry.
And what do you plan to present today?
I am representing the Protestants who had registered their opposition via RCO letters, as well as having been at the last hearing to testify, but the hearing was cut short to ask that we compromise.
At that time, Mr. Consul was the attorney or the applicant, and according to what I'm hearing from Mr. Bouvet, this is going in a direction that is not what Mr. Consul and I agreed to.
Okay, well now, Mr. Bouvet, you can continue.
Yeah, I don't know about that. It's the applicant's position here.
um so this is a facebook uh communication that was posted and and i just want to make note of
something interesting at first i thought i'm sorry to interrupt sharing but mr bobe wouldn't it be
fair to allow miss haskins to put on her case before yes yes you're absolutely right and i
just asked the board that just a matter of orientation on how we ended up getting here
We had a hearing May 5th. We were given explicit instructions to try to come up with a compromise. And between now and then, what took place was, and this is what I wanted to point out, the public was notified by Ms. Haskins and the Protestants that this was a 96-foot building.
And we don't have to go into any of this, but we actually saw photos.
We took this photo of the protest that took place at our location saying it was a 96-foot building.
I'll yield my time.
I'll let Ms. Haskins present.
But I wanted to let you know that from the time that we met, we were given explicit instructions to try to come up with a compromise.
what took place was something completely different and we are at wit's end and want to come to the
board for a decision. I yield. Thank you. Ms. Haskins, you may proceed. Good morning. I believe
that the procedure should be that I'm allowed to cross-examine the applicant. The proceeding that
would have occurred had I been the attorney representing the opponents on May 5th, would
have been to allow me to cross-examine after their case in chief. Mr. Bouvet is testifying here to
case in chief. Mr. Bouvet is testifying here to a Facebook post and how their wits in and so forth
and I haven't had a chance to cross-examine the applicant to put on the record what actually
occurred in our negotiations. And also, the Facebook post that he is showing does not show
the exchange of the applicant with several members of this Facebook group, the Philadelphia
urban planning community group. That is a very influential group. And Mr. Yakubov actually put
on things that were not true. There was one sign, he's correct, there was one sign that said
96 feet high. There were 10 or 12 signs that had the correct height. And therefore, I doubt if
anyone was convinced by one sign. My post was an error and I corrected that post later, but none of
that is being shown on the Facebook. Moreover, most of this testimony that you're hearing now
from Mr. Bouvet is irrelevant as to whether this applicant has an unnecessary hardship
and meets the legal standards. So I would like the opportunity to cross-examine Mr. German.
I object. He hasn't testified. He has testified on the record.
He hasn't testified. Do you have the record? Yes, I did. I've listened three times to the record.
I still object. I thought you wanted to present your case. The correspondence that I saw that
you submitted to the board was you presenting your case with your witnesses you not once did
you say that as part of your case you wanted to cross-examine uh the applicant's uh witnesses
so i don't think that was necessary sir in the procedure i think you as an officer of the court
understand full disclosure so for you to just come here now today excuse me mr bouvet i'm sorry
interrupt you again but is your client present yes and he did testify at the original hearing
yes so ordinarily opposing counsel would be permitted to cross-examine
if the if the board wants to rule that way that's fine but i still object
thank you okay your first i would like to i would like to share the screen if i may
there are um there there are there was correspondence between me and the prior attorney
um Mr. Consul that I would like to share and I'm not sure how I do this I just click on share
screen I have not done a zoom hearing so I'm really um Miss Haskins do you have your document
that you wish to share open yes so you're going to click are you on a computer yes and i i i think
i have them set up so that i can easily scroll through but i'm not sure okay so if you look
down at the bottom of your zoom application you'll see a green button that says share
you're going to click that first right and then documents come up that you can click on that you
wish to share. And it should be those documents you have open. I see. And it should come up on
our screen once you click on them. So I had documents open in Adobe, but I don't see them.
I will see if I can find them this way. I do have a something, a document called Parkside
Hearing. Yes, you have to click on it when it opens up under the share screen menu. There should
be different documents you can click on. That's the only way they would populate on the share
screen. Ms. Hoskins, can I ask one question? Would these documents go only to the issue of whether
you were planning to cross-examine the... No, it would go to the issue of what I'm cross-examining
him about and what Mr. Gouvet has already testified is not true. And I have evidence
that he is wrong okay that you said 96 feet no I'm not saying I admit that I made a mistake
on the 96 feet I don't think it was a mistake excuse me sir you continue to interrupt me
but I also know that we corrected that record and also at our rally there
that we corrected that record. And also at our rally, there were dozens of signs out and there
have been signs on the fronts of the properties that I can show you that are correct.
To admit there was a rally. It's a 69 foot application. One person speaks at a time.
Thank you, Carol. Ms. Hannity, I'll assist you with opening the document. We have your list of
files on the screen. Mr. Beauvais, I would please request that you refrain from speaking while she
is so we can get a clean record. And I'm trying. My apologies. Thank you. And this is Sharon again.
I apologize for interrupting again. But Ms. Haskins, you and Mr. Beauvais are going back on
really things that the board wouldn't even understand out of context. Might it make more
sense for you to go forward with your case to cross-examine the witness and present your case
and then come back to these issues? Well, I would like to have the folder open
that I can show him, but I'm sorry. It's just not, for some reason, I'm just not seeing. I've
gone now to my file to see if I can find it. I had it in an Adobe file and it's just not showing up.
And I do apologize to both of you.
I don't mean to be telling you how to present your cases,
just trying to work out the most effective way.
Okay, I think I'm going to have to,
I'm just going to have to,
oh, here we go with the Adobe file.
I don't have the email in this file.
And so I can't do that right now.
As we move along, I will find that email that I sent to Mr. Consul.
Is Mr. German available?
Yes, he should be.
Mr. German, can you raise your hand, please?
And Ms. L will promote you.
He's been promoted to Panelist Vice Chair.
Thank you, sir.
Good morning.
Can you hear me?
Name and address for the record, please.
German Yacobo, Y-A-K-B-O-V, 614 South 4th Street, number 510, Philadelphia, PA 19147.
And do you swear or affirm to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
I do so swear.
Can we get this off the screen?
What do I do?
Ms. Haskin, click your share screen button and it should stop.
These are the documents I will be using when I present my case.
so they're off the screen now.
No, they're not off the screen.
I'm not sure what I, it says new share.
Is that what I click on?
You should see at the top to stop sharing.
Do you see that?
Thank you.
Okay, thank you.
I don't see, is Mr.
There he is.
There he is.
Mr. Yakubov, I'm sorry. Did we swear him in yet? Yes. We did. Thank you, Cher.
Mr. Yakubov, do you recall that I sent your attorney an email asking that we set up a time
to talk on the phone? Yes. Isn't it true that during that conversation,
when you opened the negotiations
that you made a reference to what you had
that you would not negotiate against
what you have as a matter of right.
Isn't that true?
That's correct.
Isn't it also true that when I asked
what did you have as a matter of right,
you indicated that you had 45 feet and 10 units?
Isn't that true?
Correct.
In fact, isn't it true that you only have,
as a matter of right, 38 feet and four units?
No, there's bonuses that we can apply for,
like the mixed income housing bonus
that would allow us to get an additional seven feet,
That would allow us to get an additional seven feet, an additional 50% units.
an additional 50% units.
And there's also a green root bonus that we can elect if we disturb 5,000 square feet of ground, according to the Water Department.
And 5,000 square feet is not on this property, is that correct?
It doesn't have to be on the property. It has to be 5,000 square feet of earth disturbance.
The area around the property, the perimeter, the sidewalk, which is 20 feet wide and wraps around over 100 and some feet, 150 feet or so, will get us that 5,000.
Mr. Yacobov, the sidewalk is actually 10 feet.
It's actually not.
I can show you the screen.
Please do.
If you'd like.
Please do.
Now, here we go on the wrong.
There's a screenshot that I will show you in a moment, but let's keep moving on.
How do you disturb 5,000 square feet?
Square feet.
Please explain how you disturb 5,000 square feet.
Absolutely.
Absolutely. So the lot itself has, I believe, 2,200 or 2,300 square feet. We did a survey, I forget what the actual exact figure is, but that, in addition to the sidewalk that wraps around the property, comes out to about 5,000 square feet.
I'm sorry, I am really lost in trying to share this screen.
It's important for me to have the board understand that the new ordinance that was passed, the
amended ordinance passed in 2018, did call for 5,000 square feet.
It will not give him sufficient, even if he's right in the way he's calculating, it will
not give him sufficient units to climb to the number that he's applied for.
That's correct.
We're getting a variance.
The second issue that I'd like to ask you about is how you arrived at having a right
to 45 feet other than the mixed income.
According to the city planning commission, you should know the only bump up you can get
with mixed income is one or two units. How do you calculate it to bring you to 15 units?
I didn't. That's why we're here asking for a variance. I never said that.
I'm sorry, for 10 units. How did you write 10 units? It doesn't matter, right?
And on that phone call, I did the calculation with you, and we ended up at seven units by
right correct you ended up as it probably seven units or six units six or seven units depending
on whether you actually qualify for the green roof and we had that in that same conversation
that you're talking about it wasn't after the point is you misrepresented when we opened the
conversation isn't that true um you had a right to four to ten units with 45 feet isn't that true
It wasn't a misrepresentation. It was my understanding, which we then worked through that conversation that took about an hour to get to where we were.
Okay. Let's move on to another misrepresentation.
I would...
Objection.
That's not a misrepresentation.
Objection.
You have a letter from the Business Association of West Parkside.
That's correct.
Is that correct?
That is.
In that letter, in the third paragraph, which I assume your counsel can show, because I'm not able to do it right now, but in your third paragraph, the writer of the letter indicates that you will add only one story to the building.
That is also correct.
That is, just a second, please. You will add one story to the building over and above what you have as a right.
That's correct.
And we determined in our conversation, in our meeting, that you only have 38 feet as a right.
We did not determine that.
We determined that we had 45 feet by right, which we still do.
That is not determined by the City Planning Commission, and it's not determined by calculating with the City Planning Commission analysis.
It's 38 feet plus 7 feet of the bonus that you get, so you get 45 feet.
45 feet is equivalent to five stories.
It's eight feet for each height of each floor, plus one foot in between the floors for supporting joists.
That's nine feet per floor. Nine times five is 45.
Isn't it true that you also promised the business association that you would have high ceilings, 11 to 12 feet?
the business association that you would have high ceilings, 11 to 12 feet on the first floor?
That was, okay. Did you make that promise? No, I said that we need the variance in order to have
call ceilings for the proposed museum and coffee shop that we intend to put in there as a benefit
to the community that will memorialize the rich cultural history of that block. The museum.
just a second we're not getting into the cultural history we're getting into what you promised to
the business association about adding one story which i am trying to show this board
is constant misrepresentation these are not misrepresentation just because you say they're
not true doesn't make it so if you add up please add up as of right even if you assume you're going
to have 40 what 45 square 45 feet in height yes you're going to have that if you add that
that bonus and you add up all of the floors that you're going to have
it comes higher it would be higher than 45 feet it does not i just did the map each floor is eight
feet in height plus you have a first floor at 12 feet in height well that's why we're seeking a
variance in order to have a usable commercial space but by right we can still have a commercial
space that's eight feet tall it just wouldn't be really that inviting or useful so by right we
could still build five floors it's eight feet per floor plus one floor in between each floor
that's pretty much nine feet per floor times five is 45 feet so the promise that you made to the
business association you would not do uh you would not be able to do under this as a right calculation
the promise that i made is that true the promise that i made to the business association that
we need a variance in order to get that height and that's why they wrote a letter of support
that's one of the reasons for a letter of support they wrote they wrote the letter of support is
because we offered to pay to move that mural across the street, as well as build a wall
that will hold that mural that would be much larger. It would be a hundred plus foot long
wall that would be in height made out of concrete as a canvas for the mural arts program, which we
also are very proud to have. You've gone way beyond the scope of my question. You asked me
what if i applied on the letter i asked you if you would be in compliance with your promise
of a of a high ceiling on the first floor that's all i ask you if you build as a right
no no that's the whole reason of getting the letter of support
if i may break i have to object right he's answered the question three times okay right
And she's basically just saying, oh, well, she's not accepting the answer.
We'll move on.
One final question.
In the last hearing, isn't it true that you testified you had a ton of support from the community?
I do have a ton of support.
Right.
Mr. Yakovov, if you have a ton of support, what have you produced to show the residential support from the community?
at the last hearing that you were at we had a uh very prominent businessman that has a business
half a block away i asked you if you have residential support from the people who've
been there for 40 years support if you let me answer the question i would love to do that
we have that we have the letter of support that you yourself have asked me about we have a letter
of support from the mural arts program i've been to hundreds of cba meetings i've yet to see a
letter from the Mural Arts program supporting something. Thank you very much.
Objection. You won't even let him answer the question. He did answer the question.
No, he didn't. He has not answered my question. You told him to be quiet. You told him to be
quiet. My objection is noticed. I just know that you're cutting me off.
please be respectful of each other and do not speak over each other thank you so kindly
madam chair i do want to mention that councilwoman goffier is here and i want
to be respectful of her time but of course it's your call
Carol, you're muted.
am i unmuted now i would like very much for councilwoman
Am I unmuted now?
I would like to-
okay however miss haskins hold on the chair i am calling councilwoman gautier okay to be promoted
and i'll swear her in hello
okay i don't see you but i hear you can you hear me
yes i can i can hear you okay hi councilwoman um can you please put your name on the record
and then i'll swear you in jamie gaudier do you swear or affirm to tell the whole truth
and nothing but the truth yes okay for matters of the record um cheer may we please ask her to
spell her last name sure can you please spell your last name g-a-u-t-h-i-e-r and your address
is in city hall can you state that room 586 city hall okay thank you you may proceed hold on real
quick before we start can counsel can you remove that uh from the uh stop sharing please when we
get that off the screen? Oh, I'm so sorry. Here we go again. Stop sharing. Thank you. Okay, great.
Jane, Councilwoman. Okay, are you ready for me? Yes, yes, we are. Okay, sorry. Madam Chair and
members of the board, I'm here today to ask that you deny the granting of this variance for this
property that is located at an important gateway into the city and into West Philadelphia.
There is no physical hardship for the height and density variances, and this represents an
overbuild of a small property at an already congested intersection. I imagine this is a lot
that many people here today have passed by dozens of times without even realizing it was private
property because of its small size and the mural behind it. The parcel is not much larger than a
standard Parkside Avenue row house parcel, yet this applicant is proposing a building that's
almost double in height compared to what's around it. The claim that they can get something
relatively similar by right is untrue and irrelevant even if it were true because that's
not what they are proposing to build. They could also build a 38 foot tall building with ground
floor commercial by right. That's what the base zoning allows without needing a ZBA hearing,
which the coordinating RCO has said is something they would support.
We also believe there to be issues with flooding on the property. So assuming a five-story building
would require an elevator, that also requires digging significantly under the ground. And I
would want to hear from L&I or the water department to see if a building of this scale is even
feasible in the first place based on the environmental condition of the site on the subject
of community input the vote at the east park side residential associations rco meeting was 41 to 12
in opposition and our office has also received dozens of letters and phone calls in opposition
as well about 30 in total not including the hundreds that have signed the rco's petition
This is the community feedback that has resulted from the review process as outlined in the zoning code.
I know the ZBA is receiving conflicting information about community opinion and community process, so I feel the need to clarify the record here.
The applicant is presenting support letters from the Business Association of West Parkside and Mural Arts Philadelphia as if they are proxies for the community.
They are not. I don't question the intentions of these organizations because I know that they're
concerned, just like I am, about the prospect of the mural on this site going away without
relocation. However, neither of these groups are RCOs, and they don't cover the geographic area
where this property lies, so they are not a counter in any way to the voices of East Park
site neighbors. I am also very deeply concerned about what appears to be an ultimatum to the
people of East Parkside. My building for your mural. That's not what genuine collaboration
looks like. We are grateful for efforts to come up with a vision to ensure that this landmark
mural lives on should this property be developed. Whatever the outcome this morning,
our office will work with both East and West Parkside to make sure the community's preferred
vision for the artwork is implemented. But that's not what this hearing is about this morning.
The question here this morning is whether this development proposal is worthy of zoning relief
or not. Making a piece of community artwork contingent upon a zoning variance distracts from
Making a piece of community artwork contingent upon a zoning variance distracts from the core question of whether this variance application has merit or not.
In our opinion, it doesn't.
And so for all these reasons, I'm asking that the board deny the variance.
Thank you very much for your time today.
Thank you.
Thank you.
If I...
Question woman, Garthier.
oh she left i was gonna see if we could uh ask her a couple of questions she's back here oh um
if the board would allow me i just have one question one um if that's all right with you
madam councilwoman sure um that are you familiar with the petition that went around i heard you
mention it have you seen it um my staff has seen it okay i have not seen it directly okay because
that petition does not describe the project it actually says something different and and and i
understand the the the rationale that the community is upset but i think the community
but like you said in your statement there's been a lot of uh misinformation so uh but you didn't
see it your staff saw it so that's that that was all I wanted to say thank you um my staff has been
very intimately involved um in in this project they have also been um very engaged with the
community I have no doubt that the community understands exactly what is being proposed and
has been very vocally against it. If I may, this is part of the Ms. Haskins exhibit,
so if I can just show the title of the petition. Hold on.
it it actually says it's a five-story building that will have first commercial space on the
first floor and four units there that that's not the case and and it that suggests five
four units per floor for five stories that suggests there's 20 units and and and i would think
if i may i'm sorry okay i i see here five-story building with four units and to me that sounds
like that could be 20 units. I just wanted to point that out because the council did say
there was a lot of communication misrepresentation. I believe Ms. Haskins was trying to say that the
misrepresentation is on my client's part, and I just respectfully will have to say that's not
the case. Thank you for your time, Councilwoman. I appreciate your passion about this, and I'll
make myself available if you want to discuss this afterwards. Thank you. Madam Chair, am I still
presenting my case? Yes, you are. I would like to address the petition. If you multiply,
if there is a commercial on the first floor and you multiply
four times four,
I think you get 16. That might be an error of one.
Yeah, it's a one-unit error, of course, but I don't
think that would influence the concern, the
change in mind of the opposition.
The concern is the height of this building.
Point of clarity, the application calls for six floors, and if you look at the site, please, I'm sorry, I'm sorry, the application calls for six floors with three units per floor.
What you describe here is not the project, and you are trying to dismiss the quote-unquote error saying, oh, I'm off by one based on the calculation.
You're trying to have the reader assume that this is a different project.
So in other words, you're saying that the petition actually lessens the impact?
I'm just saying that the petition does not accurately reflect the application.
So if that petition does not affect, does not accurately reflect the application, then what other things have been said?
application, then what other things have been said and put out there to the community
that has been miscommunicated? I started off my presentation or my orientation to the board
by showing what you're claiming was an error, which was compounded by a poster, which you're
saying that, oh, well, there were photos that corrected that. So I'm just saying we're looking
at a 96-foot story building. Now we're looking at a five-story building. We're looking at
four units. We're looking at a project that does not exist, only in the eyes of what the
Protestants have been told. Madam Chair, I think it's important that we understand that
the petition drafted by my clients before I started to represent them, in essence,
presents the complaint, which is a building that is too high for the 2,800 square foot
lot. And I would like very much to move on now to my presentation. I want to thank Councilwoman
Gauthier for her testimony. It pretty much sums up all that my witnesses would testify to.
However, I would just like, they waited here for a long time, and I would like for them to
identify themselves and to have them just simply state on the record their opposition and who they
represent. That would be great. If there are any witnesses here, please raise your hand.
I'd like to call Joyce Smith. Okay. And Jihad, Jihad Ali.
Hi, Mr. Ali. Can you put your name and address on the record, please, and spell your last name?
Madam Chair, does the council want to call Ms. Smith first?
I did want to call Ms. Smith first. If you want to swear them both in now.
Ms. Smith, are you there?
There's no one with that name, Hen, who's up. I have a Bridget Powell.
if we could proceed with Mr. Ali we're running low on time okay great thank you Tanya Mr. Ali
your name and address on the record and spell your last name Jihad Ali A-L-I 43-4276 Parkside
do you agree to swear or for him to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth
I do. Thank you. You may proceed. Madam Chair, I would, before we start, Mr. Ali is a close
neighbor of the woman whose house has the mural on the side, and she passed yesterday. She was
going to be a witness, and I just want to acknowledge that she had worked very hard,
and they found her suddenly passed in her home.
Mr. Ali has been involved with this for some time,
and I will question him with that understanding of his grief
for the mourning of Donna Peters.
Mr. Ali, can you tell the board how long you have lived on East Parkside?
I moved in East Parkside.
last year and would you would you say how close you are how far is your home from the
from the corner i'm less than 250 feet from the corner okay um what do you know about the
project that was proposed that has been proposed and what is your position well i i you know i've
attended several meetings with the previous council, Mr. Council, and I was surprised this
morning to see the distinguished representation by Delos Parkston. But at one of our previous
meetings, the reason why we had that four floors per unit, because the applicant had produced a
drawn dated 11-27-20, drawn by a registered architect, Francis Zepha, who's from Haverford
designs, and it clearly had the floor plans on sheet A4 that identified there were four units
per floor. So that's where that four units per floor came from. And I would further like to add
that as far as the letters of opposition from the neighbors within 250 feet, council, that's
uh council that's something different we i myself signed a letter as a nearby uh resident
something different. I myself signed a letter.
that i was in opposition to this project and if you could produce that because that's those are
actually two separate set of uh documents the letters that the near neighbors went to within
250 feet sign and then the petition but i do just want to confirm that that petition was accurate
because Mr. Yakovic and his counsel produced a drawing for 430608 Clark's Act
that proposed a floor plan on sheet A4 on assignment 11-27-2020.
That's all we could go by.
If he's done, I would like to have Mr. Yakovic speak.
Excuse me, sir.
I want to find out if – I want to have one more question,
and I did say I would be brief.
Mr. Ali, did you have occasion to research the size of the sidewalk in front of the building?
And what did you find?
Well, I found a length like 10 feet 9, maybe at the peak of it, it might be 11, 11, 9, but all of them were about within 10 feet.
And where, what is the source of that information?
Well, it was two sources.
One is the city's atlas website, which has a measuring tool on it.
And the other source was actually went out there physically and measured the sidewalks.
Thank you very much.
Your witness, Mr. Bubo.
I just have one question.
I just wanted to share my screen.
And then I wanted to call my client applicant as a rebuttal.
This is the site plan that was submitted to L&I, which is the basis on which we're here today.
The site plan has to be signed and sealed by an engineer, and it has to show what are the right-of-ways along here.
But along here, we can see that the entire right-of-way for Parkside Avenue is 20 feet, 60 feet, 20 feet.
What that means is that on the city plan, it means there's a 60-foot cartway, meaning the street, and then 20 feet on the other side for a sidewalk, 20 feet on the other side for the sidewalk.
So, Mr. Ali, and we see the same on Belmont Avenue.
So, are you saying that you measured 10 feet and you physically went out there to Parkside and Belmont Avenue and you measured 10 feet and you're saying it's not 20 feet?
Yes, that's what I'm saying.
But yet the city plan is showing 20 feet.
Now, with you seeing that, have you taken steps to inform the city about this conflict that supposedly exists?
Well, I don't know if I would clarify it as a conflict counselor. If you look at the drawing, if you could blow it up so we all can see it more, if you can identify what that dotted line is.
The dotted line is a measurement. And what is the measurement between the two dotted lines?
it looks like the looks like 10 feet to me counselor it looks like actually we're
can i point it out to you one at a time please yeah so can you see the where it says the walking
zone 10 10 feet zero do you see that right there where you're right there yeah i see that you see
that and you believe that's in between the dotted lines and here is the existing curb
here is the furnishing zone and here's the where the building zone well which you asked so the
entire i'm sorry the entire area is 20 feet counselor we are looking at two different points
we are we are referencing two different points in time we're representing we are representing
what is out there right now and what you are showing is what will be in the future you are
showing the building that's built if you can back out that you can zoom out that's showing the
building if you zoom in a little where we can see that the shaded area that is the proposed
six-story residential multifamily building with commercial space on the first floor
at 4306. That's not there now. That is what he is proposing to do looking forward.
That is what he is proposing to do looking forward.
But Mr. Ali.
But, Mr. Ali, are you aware?
Counselor, please.
I'm not a lawyer.
Go ahead.
Answer your question.
One at a time, guys.
One at a time.
One at a time.
And I'd also like to make an announcement that this is going to be cut off at 1215.
So try to get in whatever you need to.
Understood.
I do want to answer my question, Counselor.
If you just, if the court would allow me to just, you know, I'm not a polished attorney like you, sir.
Just go ahead and ask the question.
The question that I wanted to ask is, was asked, are you acknowledging that there is a right-of-way of 20 feet?
And if you're saying that right-of-way doesn't exist, then that's your answer.
No, that's not what I'm saying. I'm saying clearly what I pointed out to you, that you're drawn in the case that there's a 10-foot walkway. Walkway means, what's your definition of a walkway? Mine is a sidewalk. And that is as it exists today. You're showing us a drawing that will be, if this board approves this story, that will be in the future. That's not today.
So are you aware, and then we're done with this, that no one can build in the right of way? That's the point that I'm trying to make.
So even if you're showing everything from your perspective, there is no way that an applicant, a developer, anybody with private property can build on the right of way without some sort of additional approval.
which will amount, which in this case, in the city of Philadelphia, will amount to an actual ordinance, the act of council.
So anything, every development has to stop short from that.
So I could assuage your fears that nothing, that the 20-foot right-of-way will remain.
No other questions.
Can I reply?
It wasn't a question.
You did ask me a question. Did you ask me was I aware? Did you not ask me that?
That you were aware of the 20-foot, and then your response was asking me to zoom in. You highlighted the 10 feet. I zoomed back out. I explained to you that 20 feet is the cartway, and I clarified for you that no one's allowed to build into that right-of-way.
that's not what you asked me i've been muted all this time i have been asking for the chair to
please um allow me to continue to present my case this question was asked and answered by
mr bouvet and he has now taken five minutes and i was very much i've not heard you i've not heard
you no i didn't realize i had been muted again i'll be careful and watch your sign i am muted
her because there was telephone
calls. Please be mindful that there
are people listening on, and if you
have a call to take or other business,
please mute yourself. Thank you.
Thanks, Tanya.
Excuse me, sir.
May I please continue?
Thank you very much,
Mr. Ali. I don't
know if Ms. Joyce Smith
is available
If she's not, I will just simply conclude our case.
Can we find out if she's here?
Ms. Smith, could you please raise your hand so we can unmute you?
Thank you, Ms. Sockett.
I think she's there.
Ms. Smith, can you hear me?
Yes, I can.
Hi, can you put your name and address on the record, please, and spell your last name, and then I'll swear you in.
Okay, my name is Joyce Smith.
S-M-I-T-H. My address is 4251 Viola Street.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Okay, thank you.
Ms. Haskins, you have to unmute your...
Okay, I'm unmuted.
Good morning, Ms. Smith.
Good morning.
Would you please inform the board of how long you've lived in East Parkside?
I've lived here since 2006.
6. And what is your position with Centennial Parkside CDC? I've served on the board since 2015
and I've been vice president about three years and I also serve on Community Development Committee.
Thank you. Can you briefly describe some of the work you've done in planning for this
East Parkside
for East Parkside's
uh for east parkside's um revitalization sure um uh well one of the things that i that our mission
revitalization?
is as a community development committee is to carry out five priority areas that we developed
in our strategic plan which was housing and home ownership um i've worked with two groups
the vital street business association um and centennial parkside cdc and having the working
to get the remapping of our area um the remapping was necessary to uh because it was very archaic
at that time um some of the other things that we did uh was to um get a public garden into the
neighborhood trust fund um and with the support of the planning commission and our former councilwoman
Jamie Blackwell, we were able to do the remapping. What's going on now is all of the work that these
two groups have done is being eroded by a number of projects that are requiring high density
in their projects. What is the position of the CDC that you're vice president of on this project?
We oppose it. We oppose it along with the other groups, APRA and BSRA.
And Centennial Parkside CDC is one of the RCOs, correct?
Correct.
What have been your dealings with the applicant on his development projects over the years?
So over the years, I do attend...
And this project as well.
Okay. Over the years, at least I attend at least 90% of the RCO meetings, and we've experienced the uptick in those meetings because a lot of the projects are being brought on by the applicant.
We have, residents have made it very clear that we're not against the development.
We're just asking, we're being more outspoken about the density issue because of the long-term impact it's going to have in our community.
So we have shared this with this applicant as well as a couple of other affiliates, that this is a concern. And so most of the votes that come in or the community's perspective is that your density is just, it's really not in the best interest of the community.
um and even in i've had some correspondence with the applicant back in 20 uh 2020 august 19th and
august 30th where i explained the income demographics of east parkside i also sent them
some data and um information about our community um and what our vision is uh his response at one
of our recent community meetings when we had a chat in the RCO was we didn't have a solution.
And I was clearly, I explained that in an email to him when we were having a discourse
about this very issue. Well, not this issue per se, about the density and some issues
the community was having about the number of units that he was crowding into his projects.
I have put up a screenshot of several photos of the intact neighborhood block, rather, at 4300.
Can you confirm that this is the 4300 block as it appears today?
Can you see this photo?
Yes, I'm looking at it.
Yes. And can you confirm that people who have been objecting to this project have lived on this block, for example, Ms. Donna Peters, who passed yesterday, they've been on this block for over 20 years or over 30 years. They are long-term homeowners. Can you confirm that?
Yes. Yes, they are.
All right. Thank you. Your witness, Mr. Bouvier.
hi i if you can i'll take the screen down i just have one question um can you see my screen
yes all right i'm showing you a zoning map that has the site um my hand my my cursor that looks
like a hand is waving over the property can you see that yes i can okay so we're along park side
this area is Belmont. This area, are you familiar with 1715 and 1717 North 42nd Street,
one block over? Yes. All right. Did the Centennial Park support 12 units in a single
family zoning with only 2,700 square feet? No, we're going to be asking for
With only 2,700 square feet?
No, we're going to be asking for a decrease in that density also.
So you did not support that?
We're going to be asking for a decrease in that density also.
Do you know if some of your members who are residents of that area are supporting it?
Some members of I can't speak to that, sir.
Do you know if other RCOs are supporting it?
I think we're on an irrelevant object is irrelevant what you're talking about.
No, you asked her if she knew if everyone on the block was there for 20 years.
That to me is telling me that she is aware of all of her neighbors.
So that's why I asked the question.
It is impossible.
It is impossible.
I respectfully disagree, and please, you know, don't cut me off.
Madam Chair, I object to this question.
That's your position.
He is taking up the time of my presentation with these relevant questions.
I am done, Ms. Haskins.
That was my question.
One at a time, Ms. Halsey.
While you have your, while you have this.
Here, go with your presentation.
stop there's 10 more minutes
Ms. Haskins you have to unmute yourself again
oh sorry
that you would like to add to to your testimony
I'm sorry you said could you repeat that Ms. Haskins I'm sorry
I said is there did I didn't know whether you were cut off
is there anything that you would like to add to your testimony
I just want to, I just want again to speak to the density. And also I have made it very
clear to the apathetic and the community has made it very clear to the applicant at RCO
meetings that we are concerned about the density that seems to be accelerating in his projects.
I even sent him an email, all some research that we had done in Brandywine, Brandywine
Realty Trust had did some research and data for us as well as the University of Pennsylvania to
get him to understand our concerns about identity, our need for more single family housing for the
future of our and the wealth and benefit of our neighborhood. So we're just, it's not like we
don't want to work with him. We're just asking him to please listen to us what we've been telling
him for a number of years. Thank you. Thank you, Ms. Smith. I'd like to just simply conclude
and summarize our presentation. We've got testimony about the attempts by this community
to work with Mr. Yakubov. But the issue here is not only listening to the RCOs that are
zoning code as the authorized input for the zoning board's process, it is clear that this
project does not in any way meet the legal standards that are required for a variance.
There's no unnecessary hardship for height and density. There's just no way that he can justify
that he can't put a building there.
I mean, he said that he can put a building there
at 38 feet and six units
and with commercial on the first floor.
It would be a three-story building.
It would be in line with the existing row houses
that I've shown you.
It would not destroy the sunrise,
seeing the sunrise on the porches of those houses.
more importantly this is not a public benefit to to this community and it was it it it he actually
you know knew when he bought this property that he was um he'd had a 2800 square foot property
and had a real limitation on density but he has proceeded so it's self-created
All of those are the legal standards that this board is required to look at.
You heard the testimony, the impressive testimony from Councilwoman Gauthier.
You've heard the vice president of the CDC talk about having to, having to.
the vice president of the CDC talk about having to having tried to work with Mr. Brian Harris,
who testified at the first hearing, and who is head of the East Parkside Residents
Neighborhood Association, could not be here today because his mother passed last week,
and so he's funeralizing his mother today. But this community is very tight knit. It is very
resolved that the density and the overbuilding that is going on in East Parkside has to cease
because the developers should work with the community so that you will hear their voices
as you are acting on this application.
We therefore ask that this board disapprove this variance and that and we are willing to
compromise that for him to build up to 40 feet with six units without having to go for mixed income.
Thank you very much, Madam Chair. Thank you, Ms. Haskins. If I may? Yes. I would like to call
the applicant and I would like to share my screen.
um we have five more minutes i should be i should be able to get it done
i i should be able to get it done okay thanks
uh okay german can you describe to me what i have um in front of the board yes you have a
letter of support from the centennial parkside community development corporation that which uh
miss smith is a vice president of supporting a uh development of 12 units on a single family lot
a block away like you showed on your map so submitted to the rco for next week's zba hearing
okay and the only concession only benefit they have if you scroll down it says that they're
asking for a porch uh under it says letter with explanation with front porches i'm guessing
that match the facade of the community.
Again, this is a 12-unit project
that is on a single-family zone lot,
different than ours, which is CMX2,
and it doesn't count all of the benefits
that we're conveying onto the community.
Okay, speaking of benefits,
why don't you describe to us what you are offering?
Because there was talk about
that you're holding the mural hostage,
which which i find ridiculous so why don't you make it clear for the board what is it that you're
doing for the community that couldn't be further from the truth so the we love the mural and we've
worked with our neighbors in the past um this is just one of those things it's just economics right
so there are three or four key benefits one of which is moving the mural across the street
repaving the adjacent 21 neighbors' driveways, which have been dilapidated over the last two
decades, in addition to creating a more or less common space in that first floor commercial space,
turning that into a museum that would commemorate the Philadelphia Stars and the Negro League.
And those three benefits cost money. In order for us to do those things and get the height
for that commercial space, we need the variances.
We've also offered to still have those benefits
and still reduce the project.
We offered to take one floor off and make it 12 units
and have the building be 52 feet in height
plus the pilot house.
Another option we offered was to keep the building
the same height, but make 20% of the units,
which is three of them, fully affordable
with a deed restriction that would last 50 years
and run with the property so who would ever buy it would have to conform to that so there are so
many concessions that we've made and the reality is is we want this mural to survive and even in
the plan the city has their 2035 plan it calls for a an additional um tourist attraction on that
corner and we're offering to provide that with private money without tax dollars and that will
continue to live in perpetuity and augment the the the amazing memorial park across the street
um we've it's like this building is not an old city right so the rents that we would get for
these projects for these properties are not the same that we would get in other places so six
units just doesn't cut it almost doesn't even make the building feasible it only at 12 units
can we have all of those benefits uh that that it would work that because that's just that's
just the reality of it having so in other words you know the this project will actually
So in other words, you know, this project will actually enhance that corner because not only will you have the mural relocated, but inside the park dedicated to Negro baseball, but you will also have this cafe that will be this museum as well as, you know, a tourist attraction for dedicated towards Negro baseball.
yeah am i correct that's correct and that's really the the crux of it and that's the main
reason we got the letters of support from the west power outside business association because
they were the ones responsible for that mural to be put up 15 years ago to begin with they worked
really hard uh marjorie ogilvy miller parker and a whole bunch of other people listen to hudson
worked very very hard to get that mural put up there they worked with the phillies and they
talked about getting the phillies involved with the the community um that the cafe on the first
floor to really have the memorabilia. And that's great. I think we just have about a minute left.
And I have somebody in the virtual audience who would like to testify. I would like to have an
opportunity to respond to one thing he said about the driveway. His trucks have been using the
driveway to drive behind the houses that he owns, I guess one or two houses that he owns,
or for whatever reason.
And that is a part of the damage to the driveway.
So he has a legal obligation to repair.
That is so irrelevant.
It is irrelevant to talk about a driveway.
Nonetheless.
One person at a time.
It is irrelevant.
Please, Ms. Haskins, may I?
Okay, there's somebody in the virtual audience who would like to testify. I think it's Lorraine
Gomez. Can somebody promote her? Hi, this is Lorraine Gomez. I'm not to testify, but
I was not at my desk, and there is supposed to be a letter of support from me.
Ma'am, could you just state your name on the record to be sworn in?
Sure. My name is Lorraine, L-O-R-R-A-I-N-E, Gomez, G-O-M-E-Z. And it was stated that I sent in a letter of support.
Okay. Do you swear for me to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
So are you in support or do you oppose this?
I'm with the community. I'm the chairman of the zoning. So I'm standing with the community.
I did not submit a letter of support.
Okay, thank you.
Thank you.
Madam Chair.
Madam Chair, excuse me.
I believe that's one more person.
No, we're done.
We're done.
Madam Chair, let's proceed, please.
Okay, thank you.
Thank you, Madam Chair.
Ian Hegarty for the Philadelphia City Planning Commission.
We have our recommendation on the record, but I'll just restate it. The comprehensive plan recommends no change from the existing commercial mixed use zoning at this location.
the triangular lot shape does support a claim of physical hardship with regard to open space
and yard requirements but we feel that the degree of the proposed variances exceed the minimum
variance that would afford relief in particular the dwelling unit count and the height have no
rational nexus with the physical hardship and are simply an overuse city planning commission
recommends that the board deny the variance thank you calendar number zero one three seven
4306 parkside avenue my vote is no my vote is no my vote is no
mr snell
are you voting
he might not be available chair but we do have a
quorum
Mr. Smile you might
need to go out and come back in
yeah I think there's a problem
so madam
chair we do have the next person
available for the next
hearing
thank you madam chair thank you and which one is that that's number six okay thank you that's
christopher dean he has arrived calendar number zero zero five eight three zero two one amber street
3-0-2-1 Amber Street Mr. Dean has been promoted to panelists he's coming back in
good afternoon madam chair and members hi name and address please and uh i will and can you spell
your last name and i will swear you in sure uh Christopher Dean um i'm representing i'm at 50
south 16th street suite 1700 uh zip is 19102 and i represent paul greenridge who i believe
is should be on the call or be joining shortly and the address um the applicants add the address
in question is 3021 amber street you swear for him to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth
let me see if paul i won't be testifying but um
my client my client has been on um let me just make sure
um mr dean did we get a response to the question oh do you swear or affirm to tell the whole
truth and nothing but the truth yes you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate
to its accuracy? Yes. Have you emailed the exhibit packet with the required documents consisting of
ownership, proof of ownership, tax compliance, refusal or referral, photos, plans of the property
five days in advance of this hearing, and have you met with the RCO? And do you have a letter?
Yes. And my client, Paul Greenridge, appears to be on as well, if you wanted to swear him in as
well. Sir, can you put your name and address on the record? Paul. He's available and unmuted.
i'm not sure what the problem is see what
if we can proceed i'll proceed um
so madam chair members this is an application for it's an appeal of a refusal for a two-family
dwelling. My client purchased this property at 3021 Ambridge Street in 2013. He did not obtain
title insurance. It was not cost beneficial to do so. He purchased this for $1,000.
The property has, it's very unique, and he does suffer a hardship because the unique physical
characteristics of the property. He was unaware, was not zoned as a single family.
there is a um and if i may share my screen
all right mr dean may i interrupt you yes at the end of this case miss sunkett we're going back to
the last case because the board member would like to vote it he listened to the entire case and i
think got knocked off and was put back on and we had already moved on to the next case sure madam
chair okay do you want to do that now or when mr dean finishes um if we could clean the record and
do it after mr dean finishes okay great thank you kindly thank you i'm sorry mr dean that's okay
my client purchased uh property and i said without title insurance but was under the impression
um and it was advertised as such that it was a uh it was a duplex uh however it was not
obviously uh it's a very unique property in that the there is our the first floor has its own
separate entrance um and on may i'm going to attempt to share my screen here bear bear with me
and paul are you on the line
not sure
okay the property has a first floor entrance on street side on amber street the second floor
entrance um to actually get to the second floor you cannot even get through it you have to go
outside and go go up the stairs to get to the second floor and I'm going to go through the
pictures. Here is the second floor entrance. This would be on the corner of Elkhart.
here is the second floor entrance um this would be on the corner of elkhart street that um
i'm sorry for the pictures being sort of out of order here
that's okay i'd also like to mention that somerset neighbors for better living
have given you a letter of support and councilman squilla
also uh has submitted a letter in non-opposition you may proceed again so from that door the way
to approach the second floor the second um apartment is this separate staircase you cannot
attain it um access through the first floor apartment so to go back to go back on these
these pictures um the second floor has its own its own kitchen so they have separate kitchens
separate entrances separate bathrooms um essentially everything is set is separate
this is the first floor kitchen kitchen hallway um another picture of the first floor kitchen
um and there's the first floor entrance so they have completely separate entrances
um it has it's been that since my client purchased it my client does um and uh and paul again if
If you're there, I'm not sure what's stopping him technology-wise.
He does have – the only thing we do not have is the tax clearance.
He has made several requests through revenue.
I do have a printout.
Here it is.
Can everyone see the – this is his – the only property he owns, and it is – this was printed out today.
For Amber Street showing no tax liabilities, I have instructed my clients to make an appointment with revenue
in person since um any acts any attempt online has not worked to this date
and so essentially the the unique physical characteristics of this property upon purchase
um my client didn't make any of these alterations himself it it came as is um preclude him from
having a essentially operating this home as a single family home they have two separate entrances
and we would entertain any questions you have
is there anyone in the virtual audience with questions
i see no hands madam chair does the board have any questions no no mission i'm sorry madam chair
this is tanya i just wanted to confirm that revenue does state texas are all paid up thank
you so much thank you ian thank you chair tanari ian hegarty for the philadelphia city planning
Commission. Comprehensive plan recommends no change to the existing RSA 5 zoning at this
location. Field applicants met the burden of demonstrating unique physical circumstances
or conditions of the property to justify an unnecessary hardship, and so the City Planning
Commission would recommend that the Board grant the variance. Thank you. Calendar number 00583021
amber street my vote is yes my vote is yes my vote is yes my vote is yes okay we're going to
go back to the resumption here in calendar number zero one three seven forty three oh six parkside
avenue so that mr snell can vote that case thank you chairwoman uh my vote uh was no
apparently i had an issue uh with my laptop but my vote is no thank you so much that concludes
the morning hearings
tanya is that correct it does conclude it right it appears as though madam chair but if we could
just ask the question to ensure we didn't leave anybody out of the 9 30 session okay is there
anyone in the virtual audience who has not been heard? I see no hands, Madam Chair.
Thank you, Fatina. That concludes the morning session. Thank you, Madam Chair.
All right. See you guys later on. My name is Carol Tenere.
Good afternoon. My name is Carol Tenere, and today I will be the Chair of the Zoning Board
of adjustment i'll be participating in today's hearing along with board secretary confessor
plaza and board members thomas holliman and james snell board administrator fatina
and board members thomas holloman and james snell board administrator fatina l and board
attorney sharon saletta are also in attendance as well as tanya socket 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, we'd like to advise everyone that this proceeding is being recorded and that
by participating, you acknowledge your agreement to be recorded. This is available to the public
and on the web. Third, for anyone participating by phone, if you wish to testify, you must raise
your hand by hitting star nine then star six to unmute yourself. That's hit star nine then star six
to unmute yourself. To enter an appearance statement call 267-270-5548 and leave your
email address and address of the property at issue. The number again is 267-270-5548.
Fourth, the question and answer box is not for testimony.
Any comments are to be directed to Ms. Tanya Sunkit or Ms. Fatina L.
Okay, I have no continuance list.
Yes, I do.
So, calendar number MI2020-001-856-1715 North 59th Street.
This case is continued.
This is a third-party continuance request, and it's opposed by the applicant.
MI2021-001242, 6000 Lime Kiln Pike.
Madam Chair, if you could call, I believe it's Sandra Broadus of ACCA and Rachel Pritzker, the applicant's attorney, if they're present.
Okay. Rachel Pritzker, are you present? And Sandra Broadus, are you present?
The RCO is the Concerned Community Association, which is requesting the continuance.
good afternoon chairwoman i also believe charles richardson from the council office should be able
to speak to this as well but i can put my name and address yep rachel r-a-c-h-a-e-l pritzker
p-r-i-t-z-k-e-r 1635 market street 1600 philadelphia pa 19103 you swear to tell the
whole truth and nothing but the truth yes is sandra broad is here oh none of the republican
as fast as drafted. Yes, Madam Chair, I'm unmuting her now. Okay. Ms. Brodus, you may unmute yourself
and please wait for the chair. Hello, I'm unmuted, I think. Hi, can you hear me? I can hear you. Okay,
great. Can you put your name and address on the record and then I'll swear you in?
sondra broadis b-r-o-a-d-u-s 5801 ogons avenue philadelphia pa 101 for one
you swear to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth i do okay and miss prisker who did you
say you thought should be involved in this charles robertson from yeah from councilman cindy bass's
office is he here yes he's been unmuted i'm sorry i'm here miss i'm here madam chair hi name and
no i know what your address is uh name please and i'll swear you in charles richardson for the
office of councilman cindy bathroom 312 city hall thank you do you swear for him to tell the whole
truth and nothing but the truth i do okay so someone goes first i don't know who well uh i'll
go first. Okay. We had a bit of a snafu in scheduling this meeting, and Ms. Pritzker
and I spoke earlier today, and we decided to jointly seek a continuance for this case
in order for us to be able to move forward with it. The council office will be the one
that will be handling the case from here on, and if we can get an expedited or accelerated
the hearing date, that would be appreciated. Okay, and that would come from Ms. Sunkit. Sandra?
Yes. You're also requesting the continuance? Yes, we are agreeable to that.
Okay, great. Tanya, will you take it from here?
Okay, great. Tanya, will you take it from here?
Yes, Ms. Pritzker can reach out to me.
Yeah, the only thing I want to confirm is this has been waiting since March to be scheduled with an RCO.
So the only reason we agreed to continue it is if we can get an expedited date.
So I just want to make sure with Ms. Sunkit that that's available.
If not, I want to move forward with putting the case on.
We have L&I violations to resolve in a business that's not been able to operate.
Somebody's got to shut off their mic, and they did.
Tanya, are you able to see if an expedited date is available, and then I can separately reach out?
I just don't want to agree to a continuance
if this is going to be kicked down to the fall.
You can reach out to me and we can discuss.
Okay, thank you.
Okay, so that case will remain open.
We'll wait to see what Ms. Sunkit comes up with.
Calendar number.
oh wait are there any requests for continuances
madam chair we have one other request for continuance this is number 11 on your list
mi 2021 001574 6425 woodbine avenue the um the applicant has decided that in the alternative to
variance he is seeking a he wants to proceed as an appeal against lni we can't go forward with
that today because we would need someone from the law department to be here we have worked out um
that this will be continued to august 17th miss sunke could you tell me remind me of the time
august 17th at 2 p.m is the letter 2 p.m thank you and that's a tuesday hearing right
yes it is okay thank you um so if you could announce that this is continued to august 17th
at 2 p.m please thank you calendar number 1574 6425 woodbine avenue this case is continued to
august 17th 2021 at two o'clock the next case is calendar number
104204 parkside avenue and is calendar number 0999 4206 parkside avenue is true console here
Madam Chair, this is a resumption hearing. At the original hearing, at the end of that hearing,
it was announced that this would be resumed today strictly for reading letters from the RCO
and Councilwoman Gaudier into the record. They specifically said that no testimony would be
taken. We do have something from the Councilwoman's office to read into the record. I have not
received an rco letter if um mr consul is here if he can confirm that he has not received one either
we can just read the councilments mr consul are you here hi carol yes
madam chair if you could then read the um
Andrew Goodman's yes please okay this is a letter from Andrew Goodman
from Councilwoman Jamie Gautier's office our office acknowledges the economic impact of
restoring these vacant properties to condition worthy of their local register designation
we would support the granting of a variance to align with the terms that the planning commission
gave on the record during the last hearing with a maximum of six units per address
instead of eight per address thank you for your time and consideration Andrew Goodman
and since there is no other letter if the board would like to go ahead and vote this case
at this time okay
this would be with a proviso well if you decide to add the request
if you would prefer to hold this for another week
If you would prefer to hold this for another week, you could also do that, your call.
Well, we don't have a letter from the RCO.
We only have it from the Councilwoman's office.
Yes, but it was announced and they were given an opportunity.
If you would like to give them one more week, you can do that or you can vote it now with or without proviso.
okay i think i will hold this for a week
okay so we'll be voted next um wednesday and next wednesday the 30th at 2 p.m at the beginning
of the session okay next case is calendar number 0730 30 west highland the attorney is carl
Primavera Madam Chair we have Steve Bertil with his hand up okay I'm gonna promote the panelists
I believe Mr. Bertil and Mr. Primavera were planning to appear okay they've been both
promoted as a panelist, you're coming back. Good afternoon, Madam Chair. Hi, Mr. Bertil.
Name and address for the record, please, and I'll swear you in. Steve Bertil, 1835 Market Street,
suite 14 uh philadelphia pa 19103 um i'm just handling the uh the visual but uh mr primavera
is doing the um the presentation okay madam chair hi mr primavera name and address please
yes carl primavera 1835 market street uh madam chair members of the board one second do you
swearer from the terrible truth and nothing but the truth. I do. Okay. And I did swear you in
right, Steve? Yes, that's correct. Okay. Madam Chair, name spelling, please. Yes. Mr. Primavera.
It's P-R-I-M-A-V-E-R-A. And also Mr. Henry Clinton Esquire is also on the line. I assume
he represents the other party, which was a near-neighbor group. We were previously before
the board in April, and Mr. Clinton and his clients requested additional time to meet as a
near-neighborhood group. We already had the support of the Chestnut Hill Community Association,
but they felt that there were some neighborhood issues that hadn't been finally resolved. So
So during the time period since that break and this resumption hearing, there have been many, many meetings with really the cooperation of Mr. Clinton and his clients and my client, Mr. O'Reilly, who's the applicant and his architect, Larry McEwen, as well as an architect for the community association near neighbors, Matt Milan.
And I'm happy to say that we do have an agreement and just by way of background, this property is split zone commercial, yet it's really in a neighborhood that we believe is more residential.
We requested a variance for residential use, and basically the community association supported it.
Through these final negotiations, we now have an updated plan, which I'll call McEwen Architects, dated 6-23-21, A210-623-ZBA.
And on that plan are three specific agreed-upon dimensional aspects.
which I'm sure I'm going to hear from Hank to say it's agreeable,
along with an operational understanding, which may not be relevant for the board,
but just to get on the record, certain terms and conditions,
which will be added to the already existing community association terms and conditions.
And we believe with that, none of which adds refusals or referrals,
and it's a reduction in the plan in any event,
We believe we have a full understanding.
There will be additional documentation among the parties,
but we think this is obviously a very great design solution
to what had been a challenging problem.
And my thanks to the community association,
the near neighbors and Mr. Clinton.
I have my clients on the line if you need to hear from them,
either Mr. O'Reilly or the architect Larry McEwen.
Otherwise, I'll turn it over to Mr. Clinton,
I'll turn it over to Mr. Clinton, unless the board has any questions.
unless the board has any questions.
Excuse me.
Excuse me, this is Sharon Saleta.
Mr. Primavera, did you submit this, the revised plan to us, along with a proviso plans form?
I believe Steve has done that, Steve Bertel.
Yes, we submitted this, what you're looking at, the schematic and the proviso form.
the finalized zoning plans are still in the works and we'll submit that for
stamps should the board grant these revisions. Well they actually can't vote on it until they
have those. Well this is it'll be identical to this we just wanted to do a cleaner a cleaner
version for stamping but if you if you want to stamp the schematic instead. But the proviso
plans form has not been further revised since you last no that that's accurate and up to date
okay that's fine and thank you
so are we voting this case i'm chairman this is henry clinton can i speak uh yes
do you swear to tell the whole truth and nothing about the truth i do please spell your last name
and put your name and address on the record sure henry clinton clint on 13 13 south 33rd street
Philadelphia PA, 19146 Queen Memorial Building. First, I just want to make sure that I get a copy
of the proviso plan and any other plan may be submitted by Carl or Steve to Ms. Soletta.
So if I can be copied on that, that would be very helpful. Following up on what Carl said,
I represent over 225 Chestnut Hill neighbors, some near neighbors, some far neighbors,
but all residents of Chestnut Hill. And over the course of the last month, Carl is correct,
there have been many discussions. It's been arduous, tortuous, but I think we've crossed
the finish line about 15 minutes ago. And the plan that Carl presented by Larry McKeel and
undated, but we agree it should be dated June 23rd, is the agreed upon plan along with some
operational issues that we've also exchanged via emails so that those operational issues have also
been accepted and agreed upon. So the time period between the last hearing and now was well used
and I think it brought everything to this culmination.
So everybody's in agreement? Yes. Yes. Thank you.
Okay. Does the board have any questions?
Planning Commission?
One moment, Chair.
The other thing, Mr. Chairman, I might say is that on the call, there's approximately 70 of the 225 neighbors who are interested in these proceedings.
and it just shows the amount of community interest involvement and dedication uh other neighbors in
that area excuse me madam yes you have charles richardson with his hand raised okay mr richardson
madam chair uh charles richardson from the office of councilwoman cindy bass room 312 city hall
as long as there is an agreement in place the councilwoman has no opposition to granting the
variance thank you so much excuse me this is Sharon again Mr. Bertil I'm going through the
addendum to your exhibits that was submitted today I see the plans that you're showing on
the screen I do not see the proviso plans form have you submitted one that matches the plans
that you're submitting yes it was not it was submitted separately per your previous request
to not to submit that as a separate document okay thank you madam we're done no okay
planning commission chair can uh the applicant clarify what has changed uh for the planning
commission in case we have to revise our recommendation yes i i can do that madam chair
basically on the plan are three enumerated and identified dimensional changes first one says
unit one the top floor set back eight feet from the face of brick at west highland avenue so that
was just to give a little further setback for the unit that faces west highland second unit one top
floor balcony set back three feet from the edge on all sides that's a railing that's being set back the idea is that it's
on all sides. That's a railing that's being set back. The idea is that it's a little more
recessed from the street. And then third, West Elevations 3 and 4, there's a design change
which really is done to create more of a sense of opening. It doesn't separate the buildings,
So there's no change to that, but it creates a little bit more of a, we'll call it, indentation.
What would you call it, Henry?
An indentation.
Indentation.
So, excuse me, Ms. Sharon again, can I, Mr. Primavera, since the Planning Commission hasn't seen these,
Would it present a hardship to your client to delay the vote for one week simply to wait for the final plan so that they can be stamped at the same time that the case is voted?
If it's convenient for the board, I'd like to see it done today only because this has been, you know, challenging due to people traveling and getting authorization from people who have been away.
and I understand that there wouldn't be any need for you even to appear it would simply be a vote
with the new plans or I'm sorry a vote and the planning commission recommendation but there
would be a delay in any case because we can't submit the vote sheet until we have the final
plans in hand so if you could have those by next week it could be voted they could be stamped the
same day and you could receive the planning commission recommendation i'll defer to uh
henry on that well now i'm going to defer to sharon mr letta mr clinton since you haven't
seen the plans it would also give you an opportunity to review them no he's he has
i i agree uh but i believe mr primavera that that these are the plans that would be
submitted and they are acceptable to us in its current form. I agree but they are not
the plans that would be stamped which is the issue. If I'm unless I misunderstood there are
this is a drawing but there will be actual zoning plans that will be stamped that are
consistent with this. So you understand I would prefer that we stamp them on the day that they
approved I understand that okay and it would be again just one week and you would not necessarily
have to appear is everyone in agreement with that I think it's less about the planning commission
if it's to defer to the planning commission as much as we respect them I think that that would
be an overindulgence given six months of negotiations with one of the more sophisticated
community groups and the these unless you have a magnifying glass you would never see the minutia
that we've resolved if it's something procedural with the board that will allow me to explain to
my client who's been at this for over a year and trying to get through the process then fine but
if it's if it's to accommodate the planning commission i'm sure they'll indulge us given
the uh the very minute changes that don't uh change if the planning commission is ready to
give their recommendation certainly that would be preferable but again this would not cause any
further delay to your client because until i have the final plans to stamp won't be turning in the
vote sheet so um you would not if the planning commission is willing to give its recommendation
now that would be preferable and then no one would have to come back next week it would simply be
waiting for plans that are consistent with the plans you've provided today well i'm sure the
planning commission wouldn't want to be opposed to the councilwoman who's heartedly endorsed a
thousand people supporting this plan okay so is the planning commission sure is is the planning
commission willing to go on record carol would you mind uh swearing me in before we proceed
i absolutely would not mind do you swear from the tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth
yes i do for the record my name is peter bernard bernard is spelled b as in boy is apple r as in
roger n as in nancy is an apple r's and roger d as a dog i am staff for the planning commission
planning commission would have no objection uh giving our recommendation today uh it was just
difficult to see
on the current sketch whether or not
the changes would have substantially
impacted our recommendation
having to watch through them I believe
recommendation
holds so I'm happy to put that on the record. Thank you and then that will just that does
so I'm happy to put that on the record
away with that part of it we are only waiting for submission of the revised plans and really in the
long run rather than you having a stamp on plans that where the stamp predates the date on the
plans everything will be consistent. So we're holding this one week to vote. One week to vote
no need no additional testimony the record is otherwise closed except for submission of the
plans excellent can we reiterate burdensome but uh we're we're happy to have this uh at this stage
thank you thank you the next case is uh yes
who's saying carol i only
see a few people sorry this was peter bernard for the planning commission
and you just read your i did not read my testimony uh into the record i just specified that we would
be willing to read our testimony into the record okay i'm sorry today's been a little crazy totally
understandable. So the proposed use for eight dwelling units is consistent with
the comprehensive plan goal of encouraging new homes and jobs along Germantown Avenue.
Further, the proposed density is less than what would be allowed by adjacent RSA 3 zoning.
The City Planning Commission recommends that the zoning board grant the variance.
Thank you. So this case will be held for one week and we will vote it in a week.
thank you very much thank you very much thank you very much thank you miss elena
welcome and just adding that the record is closed except for the plans of which we will
will be consistent with what was submitted today
thank you everyone calendar number 1625 123 reid street
There are no exhibits and this is the first listing.
I see no hands up at this time, Madam Chair.
Okay, this case will be continued.
I'm sorry
another hand just went up
Sean do you want me to allow him to speak
Sean Castanera
is the owner
thank you
he's coming back in his panel
thank you
Sean, can you hear me?
mr castanera if you unmute yourself
hi sean castanera 123 reed street philadelphia pa
uh 19147 c-a-s-t-i-n-e-i-r-a thank you do you swear our firm to tell the whole truth and
about the truth yes thank you you may proceed um i am filing for a variance for um the minimum
open area excuse me mr this is sharon saletta did you submit exhibits five days in advance
yes they were sent um last week did you did you copy me on them s-u-l-e-t-a-z-b-a at gmail.com
mine is one of the addresses to which they had to be sent um I will I don't have a record of
having received them might have just been a mix-up okay um they were sent to the um I'm checking right
now it
it was not forwarded to you or cc to you as well okay i have to review those before you go forward
madam chair could we move this case back on this list and if you could um forward those
exhibits to me now yes yes i will okay you have my email address did you get that okay
you didn't want it shouldn't be a continuance um if he if he submitted them to the rco mailbox
on time of course it's it's the board's call but um if he actually did submit everything and if i
can review them now and be sure that everything is there you're calling whether to continue it
if he simply hadn't submitted it to anyone maybe a different matter i can forward you the email
from the rco um which will show when it was sent okay and of course then the board's call
on whether to go forward we do have a letter from pensport civic and support and councilman
is in non-opposition so we just need for you to send whatever um miss saletta is requesting
yes and then you'll let me know sharon linda call the case yes i'll confirm if everything
is actually there and it was sent to the rco mailbox on time um then the board can make the
call on whether to go forward. Okay, great. Calendar number 1856, 1715 North 59th Street.
The attorney is Leo Mulvihill.
I think this case
is continued. Next case, calendar number 1264, 1910 Chestnut Street. Dina Blackman is the attorney.
Ms. Blackman is coming back in as a panelist. Thank you.
i'm sorry madam chair could i just ask a um question this is tom yeah um as far as the
previous case um would it be okay for you to announce that it is being rescheduled and for
the reason this the calendar number 1856 1715 north 59th street the attorney is leo malvihil
this case is continued and it will be rescheduled to be heard with related case for 1720 North 59th
Street. Thank you, Ms. Sunkett. Thank you, Ms. Chair. And I apologize for not including that
on your continuance list. That's okay. Ms. Blackman? Good afternoon. Can you put your
name and address on the record and spell your last name? Sure. Dina Bleckman, B as in boy, L-E-T-K-M-N,
1735 Market Street, 51st floor, Philadelphia, PA 19103. Thank you. Do you swear or firm to tell
the whole truth and nothing but the truth? I do. Do you agree to wave the reading of the refusal
and stipulate to its accuracy? I do. Have you emailed the exhibit packet with proof of ownership
tax compliance refusal referral photos and or plans of the property five days in advance of
this hearing and have you met with the rco and do you have a letter uh yes the exhibits were
submitted last week uh and we met with the rco center city residents association on april 27th
and their letter of non-opposition is included in the exhibits and we do have that here you may
proceed. Great, thank you. I will share my screen. One moment, I apologize.
Great, thank you. Madam Chair, members of the board, my name is Dena Bleckman and together
with my colleague David Guest, we represent the applicant Pearl Properties in this application
for a special exception. Also here today are Reed Slogoff from Pearl Properties and Stephen
Cook from Cook and Solo Restaurant Partners, the proposed tenant for the property.
The property here is the Harper located at 19th and Sansom streets. It's an existing development
containing residential, commercial, and retail spaces. And our application is to commit a
and our application is to permit a restaurant use in three already existing spaces along
restaurant use in three already existing spaces.
the Sansom Street frontage and those are shown on the screen by the red rectangle along Sansom Street.
Here are some photographs of the spaces currently, you can see they're fully constructed,
they're integrated with the larger development, you can see it above
the ground floor on the left photo, and they are currently vacant.
Here are floor plans of the spaces. You can see them in yellow at the bottom along Sansom Street.
And because the spaces are part of an existing development, they will also be integrated into the existing trash and loading facilities for much of the block.
The trash and loading facilities are shown here in yellow. The space is again at the bottom along Sansom Street with access to trash and loading in the rear.
As you know, the standard for a special exception is that the use not caused detrimental impacts
to the neighborhood beyond what would be expected from that use, and that is certainly the case here.
In fact, we expect that the impact on the neighborhood would be even less than would
normally be expected from a restaurant use because of that existing infrastructure
and the internal trash and loading facilities. As I mentioned, we met with the local RCO, CCRA,
and they have issued their letter of non-opposition to the use, which is included in the exhibit
packet at Exhibit 12. I'd like to turn it over to Reid and Steve just to provide some additional
details on the operations of the site. If they could please be unmuted. That's Reid Slogoff
and Stephen Cook and then be very happy to answer any questions the board or the public may have.
Okay and what is their connection to this building? Reed Slogoff is from Pearl Properties,
the owner of the property, and Stephen Cook is from Cook and Solo Restaurant Partners,
the proposed tenant of the spaces. Okay great.
read and steve i believe you need to raise your hands and then that will allow you to unmute
does the board need to hear from these two individuals
no no no okay planning commission
good afternoon madam chair i'm sorry to interrupt again as always
would it be okay for the um virtual public to be able to give testimony oh sure
planning commission
afternoon chair peter bernard for the planning commission i'm sorry
did we allow the public to weigh in yeah i was going to ask them to weigh in
after planning because i thought he was ready to speak and i didn't want to interrupt him again
okay planning commission do you want to hold off and anybody in the virtual we will hold our
comments okay anybody in the virtual audience who would like to speak
okay we have teresa jones she's been unmuted please unmute yourself miss jones and wait for
the madam chair okay wait i'm answering
miss jones yes i am unmuted hi put your name and address on the record spell your
last name and then i will swear you in please my name is theresa jones my address is 1723 north
59th street philadelphia pa i was raising my hand to see if i i'm sorry to be late to the meeting
my apologies, but I was
Is Ms. Jones here
for 1910 Chestnut Street?
Meeting for 1750
voting appeal. Am I too late for that?
No, no, me.
Chair, apparently she's not here
for this case. You can go forward.
It does appear to be Sarah Aldafer
here with her hand up for this case.
Okay, Sarah?
Hi, good afternoon. Sarah Aldefer, S-A-R-A-H.
Hi, good afternoon. Sarah Alderfer, S-A-R-A-H-A-L-D-E-R-F-E-R, 1919 Chestnut Street,
apartment 1513, Philadelphia. I'm here to- Do you swear a firm to tell the whole truth
and nothing about the truth? I do. Okay. So I'm here today in support of the application.
I don't have any problem with restaurants going in and I think that they would be
good for the area. I would just like to note that I would like if they, you know, could move,
if the owner could move a little quickly to get a tenant in the Chestnut Street side of the
building. That's, this is not a zoning matter. You can probably speak to Dina or to the owner.
Planning Commission.
Good afternoon, Chair. Peter Bernard for the Planning Commission.
This property is indicated for commercial mixed use in the comprehensive plan.
We support the granting of the special exemption.
Thank you.
Calendar number 1264, 1910, Chestnut Street.
My vote is yes.
My vote is yes.
My vote is yes.
My vote is yes.
Calendar number 1413, 2441, Aspen Street.
there are no exhibits and this is the first listing
madam chair would it be allowable this is tanya sunken for me to make an announcement
oh sure i would just ask that all present as attendees or otherwise who wish to ask a question
utilize the q a that would allow you to ask questions to the staff of the zoning board
please do not raise your hand and interrupt the proceedings as we have a lot of cases to get
through and we would not like to interrupt the board and thank you very kindly and i would have
asked you to weigh in but i i didn't think that even you had the power to get the builder to
get the restaurants moving quickly so don't don't feel that i neglected you um i'd like to move
Excuse me, Madam Chair, have we determined whether anyone is here for Aspen Street?
No, we have not. Today's that day.
Madam Chair, Justin Crick on behalf of the applicant.
There are no exhibits.
I did forward the exhibits over.
I had that email going.
It was Sunday evening, but it was to the RCOZBA, to Ms. Saleta, as well as the PCPC.
Can you name and address, spell your last name, and then I'll swear you in?
Yes. Justin, J-U-S-T-I-N, Crick, K-R-I-K. Address is 1500 JFK Boulevard, Suite 630, Philadelphia PA 19102.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
uh there is one typo in the refusal but uh excuse me i'm sorry but before we go forward
these were not submitted to anyone correct before sunday evening is the board going forward with this
before sunday evening no it should be five days in advance of the hearing
this is the first listing calendar number 1413 2441 aspen street is continued
Calendar number 1240-2928 Poplar Street. The attorney is Richard DeMarco.
Excuse me again, Madam Chair. Before you begin with this case, we have the add-on appeal against
lni mr reuter has limited availability he is in the room now would be possible to call that next
okay um i will do that calendar number one no
i can read that if he's like is is that the woodbine avenue no this is mi 2021 002596 1101
east mount pleasant avenue the applicant appellant is beatrice bolden and mr reuter will be present
to represent the city okay and i am trying to find this on our list it's not on the list so
you've read everything no this is we have discussed this and it is in the right okay
Thank you.
Mr. Reuter?
Mr. Reuter yes hi can you hear me yes I can name and address please
Leonard Reuter R-E-U-T-E-R senior attorney for the city of Philadelphia 1515 Arch Street 15th
floor you swear from to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth I do okay Ms. Bolden put
your name and address on the record, please? Beatrice Bolden, B-A-T-R-I-C-E-B-O-L-D-E-N,
1101 East Mount Pleasant Avenue, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, 19150.
Thank you. Do you swear or affirm to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
Yes, ma'am.
Okay. Mr. Reuter, you may proceed. I know there's time constraints here.
Sure. No, I mean, I have time now. There were some issues that had to get resolved, but that's pretty much taken care of. This is an appeal against LNI, and typically the appellant goes forward first, but I think in this particular case, since Ms. Bolden appears to be unrepresented, it might be a little bit faster if I just laid out what the issue is.
this is an appeal. It's actually an appeal from a violation, a zoning violation that was issued by
the Department of Licenses and Inspections. I was not able to get an inspector here,
but I think the violation speaks for itself. It's attached to Ms. Bolden's appeal.
And as the attorney representing the city here, I can certify that that is a true and correct copy
of the violation that was issued in this case. I think it's probably the easiest thing to do
would be if I could just share my screen, I will show you basically what the violation
is. I think the picture is worth more than a thousand words here. If I don't get frozen,
which it looks like I got frozen. All right. Can you still hear me at least?
I can hear you.
Yeah, it looks like I'm unable to share my screen. It just kind of froze up there.
What happened is Ms. Bolden erected an opaque fence along the rear and a portion of the side
of her property. Her property is located at 11, I'm sorry, 1101 Mount Pleasant.
let me see here
I'm sorry if I could ask a question
Mr. Reuter
this is Tanya
would it be okay for you to stop your video
because it appears as though we might be about
to lose you
and then just do audio
okay that's fine
I will stop the video
so yeah I mean
And I'm on the city's network, and as you're all aware who work for the city, the city's network is problematic at times.
So anyway, this property is located at 1101 Mount Pleasant Avenue, and it is a corner property.
and Ms. Bolden erected again a fence that's over four feet tall that is in along the rear and
portion of the side of her property and that side actually is this street facing side of the
property and it's a very simple the code does not allow for a fence over four feet tall it has to
be at least 50 percent opaque so basically you know nothing more than a picket fence
and it can't be more than four feet tall so this is not it doesn't appear to be that tall I don't
know how tall it is I think it's really more the issue of it being opaque it appears to be probably
only about five feet tall I don't think it's six feet but Ms. Bolden can explain that so that it's
just simply it's just not permitted she she's the reasons given in the appeal in the appeal from the
violation she gives a number of reasons of why she erected the fence and we have no we're not
taking any position on why she believes she needs the fence of that type at that location but
unfortunately it's just something that we can't that's just not permitted by the code we would
suggest that she simply try to seek apply for a variance. That is apply to get the fence
approved, she will get a refusal, and then she can come back to the zoning board for
a variance. And again, I'm going to try one more time to share my screen.
I'll try one more time to share my screen.
And yay.
All right.
Can you see this?
That's what she built.
And it's that simple.
This is not allowed.
The fence that she has over towards the right of the screen, that's fine.
that's not that's not a problem but she can't have the fence at this height and it cannot be solid
so that's pretty much it it's not a question of a use or there's some dispute about a use here
this is just simply a fence that's that's not permitted in the district she does state that
there are other apparent appear to be other fences down the alley or the the access easement
back there I have no idea whether those also generated violations or whether they maybe have
variances for those fences or whether they predate the restrictions but what we would offer is we
would and we do this at the board of L&I all the L&I review all the time with violations I don't
know whether this board believes it has the authority to do this but what we would say
is we would agree to have the city violation affirmed,
but I will agree to give her 120 days
to a stay of enforcement
while she goes and tries to obtain a variance
if she wants to keep the fence
or 120 days to take it down and put up one that's legal.
But I don't really have anything else
unless you have any questions.
So there is a way she could keep the fence
even though it is illegal?
well she can she can she can just try to legalize it through a variance
i've i've been trying to do all that sir um the reason why i wrecked the defense was my house has
before i moved here this house was vacant for 11 years and they were using my house as a trash dump
they were using my house um as um to pour all kinds of things like uh their uh their their
grease and everything down my drain um my house was being used like i said as a trash dump
so i erected the fence to keep the people off my property and and and and to try to save my
property um my neighbors um i paid i paid to have my whole drainage dug out and my neighbors refused
to have theirs out so they put sandbags on the back of theirs so all the water would run down
my drain and i was having to get a plumber every month i have been i have been trying to work with
everybody i had i've only been in this house six years and when you know when you get a house to
inspect it you shouldn't have to put a roof on it i've had to put a roof on i've had to have people
come in because of the water damage because of the garbage they were talking they were dumping
tires in my house. Cars were plucking across my grass after I had the grass seed put in.
It's been a battle. And this is the only thing that kept them off my property. And I don't
understand. And I've been to City Hall six or seven times trying to get a variance. I've been
trying to do everything. And so that's why I had to appeal to this board.
okay thank you i'm i'm like a 23-year vet i came here to retire i'm just trying to save my home
before i die that's it excuse me this is sharon saleta did you submit an application for a zoning
permit for the fence uh yes ma'am no ma'am they told me not to do it i've been to city hall six
times the first time they told i've been going around and around in circles and i asked miss
bolden please i'm so sorry to interrupt would you be able to turn your volume down just a snippet
i don't let me see i i don't i don't know maybe maybe if i get back is that better okay that
helps some okay thank you chair yeah um i have i have i have been down there six times i am running
in circles i don't want to tear my fence down that took quite of my retirement i had to take
money out of my 401k to build it to stop the trash because i had to i had to pay the city
a couple times to come out here and get the tires and the trash off of my property i'm sorry miss
bolden again this is tanya chair if you don't mind may i just speak for a moment absolutely
Ms. Bolden, the counselor for the city, Mr. Reuter, as well as counselor for the ZBA are trying to assist you with resolving this problem, which would be an application to the zoning unit to get a permit.
an application to the zoning unit to get a permit to legalize your fence, which would mean you will
come back to the zoning board for variance. Does that help you to understand a little bit? They're
going to try to help you resolve this problem. Yes, ma'am. This is Sharon again, and Mr. Reuter
has suggested that there be a stay of enforcement for perhaps 120 days, but given that this will
likely require a variance and um that could take some time because of our backlog of cases
i would recommend that if the board decides to deny the appeal that they also add a six
month stay of enforcement mr reuter would you have any objection to that oh no that's that's
fine. Six months is fine. Okay. And Ms. Saleta, can you please read into the record, the calendar
number? So we can vote this. It is in your text messages, if you're able to look at that.
i moved away from my computer for a moment hold on okay i have it it is mi 2021 002596 1101 east
mount pleasant avenue um the appeal is denied and there's a 120 day stay of enforcement excuse me
madam chair if you i don't think that she would be able to resolve the zoning issues in 120 days
because she will be coming back before this board so if you can make it a six month stay of
enforcement that might be more workable okay six months six months stay of enforcement
thank you okay so i do what now i go to the zoning board i'm sorry miss bolden excuse me
If we could complete the vote, please.
You're right.
I'm sorry.
Denied with proviso.
Appeal denied with proviso.
Appeal denied with proviso.
And what I would suggest to Ms. Bolden,
actually what might be the most helpful
is to contact your local council person's office,
who I believe is Cheryl Parker.
I've been trying to call her 72 times.
I'm sorry.
I'm off.
off screen please. Okay if I could just mention Ms. Bolden if you could reach out to me as well
tanya.sunket at phila.gov or the RCO email box that we sent you the letter to we can also assist
and provide you with contact information. Thank you Madam Chair. Sorry for the interruption.
Your name you said the email you sent me? Yes you'll see it the RCO email box that sent you
the letter for this erie reply to that thank you chair and excuse me calendar number before you
i'm sorry if i could interrupt again for one moment just so that you're aware we've had
a request from um attorney rachel pritzker she has a four o'clock meeting that can't be changed
she has asked that um numbers six and eight which are both unopposed if they could be moved forward
Again, always the board's call.
I want you to be aware of the request.
Calendar number 0460441 Brown Street.
Are these heard together?
No, they're separate cases.
No, they're separate.
The attorney is Rachel Pritzker.
We have a letter of support from the Northern Liberties Neighborhood Association.
and a letter from Councilman Skwila in non-opposition.
I'm just going to bring up.
Rachel, name and address, please.
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.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Have you emailed the exhibit packet with proof of ownership, tax compliance, refusal,
referral, photos, and plans five days in advance of this hearing, and have you met with the RCO,
and do you have a letter? Yes. Thank you. You may proceed.
This is 441 Brown Street.
this is the refusal this project is for the erection of an attached building
this is the refusal this project is for the erection of an attached building with roof
decks at rear second floor and side third floor roof decks and roof deck access structure with
an elevator above the third floor for use as a single family household living and to include
private residence parking garage for two parking spaces essentially we're here because in rsa5
you can't have any parking access by a front street. We don't have an opportunity to access
it from a shared driveway alley or rear street. The other two refusals are for stall depth
and stall width. We submitted revised plans to reduce it from two parking spaces to one
as the community was only in support of having one parking space. There's an existing curb cut
on this property i'll show the photos quickly rsa5 this is the lot right here
that's the property
so as the board can see there's an existing garage we were looking to utilize
um you know the existing curb cut and the garage to provide accessory off-street parking access
by a front street again um we don't have a driveway an alleyway or or any rear street to
be able to provide parking uh so that's what generated our refusal um we made some revisions
to the plans that i provided to miss saletta regarding a revised plan form to showcase the
updated plans that eliminate um one of the parking spots and just provide for a one-car garage and a
single car curb cut, which is supported
by the Northern Liberties Neighbors Association.
As you can see, they have a letter of support on my screen.
We've met with them on April 26th.
And other than that, happy to take any questions.
I can have, I believe our architects design blends are on.
If the board is interested in seeing the plans,
they would be happy to share those.
Otherwise, I'm happy to take any questions.
Does the board have any questions?
Planning Commission?
Good afternoon, Chair.
Peter Bernard for the Planning Commission.
This property is indicated for single-family residential
in the comprehensive plan.
front-loaded garages it creates conflicts with bicycles and pedestrians accordingly we object
to the granting of the parents um thank you responding sorry go ahead calendar number zero
four six zero four four one brown street my vote is no my vote is no my vote is now
My vote is yes.
Calendar number 1239, 506 North 13th Street.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
And can you put your name and address on the record again?
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.
have you emailed the exhibit packet with the required documents consisting of proof of
ownership tax compliance refusal referral photos and or plans of the property five days in advance
of this hearing and have you met with the rco and do you have a letter yep do you also agree
to wave the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy yes okay thank you you may proceed
Give a letter of support from the
The Callahill Neighborhood Association and Councilman Scuola has submitted a letter in non-opposition.
So this is 500-506 North 13th.
It's been since consolidated, so it's technically recognized as 500 North 13th Street.
This is our refusal.
This is a CMX4 property.
The application was for a lot line relocation to consolidate two existing zoning lots.
The application was for a lot line relocation to consolidate two existing zoning lots, as I mentioned, and for the erection of a three-story addition to an existing three-story structure for use as a multifamily dwelling for 23 units, including 11 dwelling units on the fourth and fifth floors with residential roof deck, access from the sixth floor and 12 dwelling units on the second and third floors with two vacant non-residential spaces.
use registration required before occupancy on the basement and ground floor with all
other uses as previously approved the only refusal we have for this project is for parking this is an
existing lot the requirements for cmx4 if you do an addition to an existing non-conforming structure
you can trigger variances again we're required to have three pretend and we are required three
parking spaces here. As I will show you, this is an existing lot that takes up almost 100%
of the lot coverage. It's also a historical existing structure, so any demolition to it
could result in, obviously, a change to the aesthetic, a change to the structural integrity
of the building and the neighborhood, as well as the surrounding community has no interest
and seeing this building demoed instead we're proposing to rehab it originally we were going
to do commercial space but given you know covid and the shift in that market and the support of
the community for residential units they were okay with giving us a de minimis variance for
just three parking spaces that we can't fit on this site i'm just gonna go to
zoning map as you can see it's a corner cmx4 lot
closer picture as you can see from the aerials the building takes up almost 100% lot coverage again
there's really no place to put three parking spaces and to have to do underground parking
could damage the structure and to do it for three parking spaces would be a hardship on the applicant
so you can see existing building being renovated um i just wanted to have um i think amanda from
cano design um go through the plans uh really quickly for the board um okay chairwoman mentioned
we did meet with the callahill neighbors association and they were in support of the
project and uh obviously the board has a letter of non-opposition from the councilman as well
is there an uh amanda
she's coming back in as a panelist okay thank you
Amanda can you hear me yes I can hear you okay name and address please and spell your
last name Amanda Anderson a-n-d-e-r-s-o-n 109 south 13th street second floor Philadelphia
PA 19107. Do you swear or affirm to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
I do. Okay. I'm sorry. What is her role, please? This is Tanya. Rachel. Okay. So we're going to
promote her. Fatina, can you promote her, please? Thank you. Sorry. Give us a moment to let her
come back in. Okay. She's been promoted. She's coming back in now.
there we go you have full control Amanda okay okay Amanda can you see my screen yes okay so
as you can see this is the first floor plan the entire I think it's like 99.8 percent of the lot
is covered with the existing building we are keeping the existing building it's um first
second, third floor, and basement right now. We are adding an addition which will have
where we want to do the 11 dwelling units in this addition and that is what triggers the
um three parking spaces
does the board have any questions no no no planning commission
Planning Commission.
Chair, Peter Bernard for the Planning Commission.
This property is indicated for commercial mixed use in the comprehensive plan.
Because this proposal is an adaptive reuse of an existing building, we feel the applicant has
demonstrated sufficient hardship and that the proposal is the minimum necessary variance.
Accordingly, we support the granting of the variances.
Thank you. Calendar number 1239506, North 13th Street, my vote is yes.
My vote is yes.
My vote is yes.
My vote is yes.
I know, I forgot to ask.
Oh, gosh.
Calendar number 1240, 2928 Poplar Street.
The attorney is Richard DeMarco.
trying to unmute here hello hi how are you gosh you look happy name and address for the record
and spell your last name hi good afternoon richard de marco uh spelled d-e-m-a-r-c-o
2005 market street it uh excuse me 16th floor good morning good afternoon do you swear for him
to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth yes you agree to waive the reading of the refusal
and stipulate to its accuracy yes i do have a quick comment on it but yes okay do you um have
you emailed the exhibit pack with proof of ownership tax compliance refusal referral
photos under plans of the property five days in advance of this hearing and have you met with the
rco and do you have a letter uh yes on everything uh except the tax clearance uh issue had to be
resolved after the submission of my exhibit. Okay. But it has been. I'll go through that.
Okay. You also have a letter of support from Fairmount Civic and Bill Greenlee, 15th Ward
Democratic Leader, letter of support. Yes. Full support from everyone. No opposition that I'm
aware of. Okay. So the only comment on the refusal, Madam Chair, I'll share my screen
I'm going to show you the refusal.
I just want to mention that we actually are adjacent to the RM1.
We are in the CMX1 district.
We are legalizing more than one residential unit above a professional office space.
I also want to mention that Sharon might want to comment.
Sharon and I spoke on this application earlier.
I did submit a revised plan proviso form because the original plan that was submitted with the application mislabeled the first floor commercial use as a grocery store, which it is not.
It is a professional office for a tutor service.
So we can do that via proviso, though.
And as Sharon can explain, I'm fine with that.
That was Sharon's suggestion.
we agree wholeheartedly to do it with the proviso that the first floor commercial use is professional
office for a tutor okay and my only comment on the refusal madam chair is that we are actually
adjacent to rm1 and i'll show you that in a moment on the zoning map so while i think the refusal is
correct i do want to mention you can see right here this is our property we are in a long line
of RM1. So really the use of having the additional a second residential unit is really consistent
with the rest of the block. And we have trash storage for all units, access to the rear.
On the tax clearance, and I'll ask Tanya to promote Rosalie Gasofsky, she has paid all of
the taxes within the last five days, including the real estate taxes. There were some outstanding
items, but they have all been paid. I'm hoping that your screens will show a zero balance.
I'll show you some of those receipts. This is one of the receipts. Rosalie was online
working on this for the last few days. She has paid, we believe, everything. There should
be a zero balance. And this is a longstanding use. This has been two residential units with
first floor storefront for many decades. The hardship would be clearly to convert the property
to one unit would require all sorts of destruction of bearing walls and it has been two units and a
commercial storefront for the length of time of the ownership of the owner. So I'll just
ask Rosalie to accept my testimony. These can be promoted.
is available rosalie are you with us yet
he's available rosalie are you with us yet
she can unmute herself unmute yourself rosalie okay i'm unmuted now i don't think i have video
though great did you hear everything i said and do you adopt it as your testimony and as true and
accurate yes all right you paid everything all of your taxes in the last since we've preparing
for this hearing you've paid every taxes that you're aware of right correct before to be all
the receipts which i in turn forward to the dining world right correct all right madam chair that's
all i have uh with that proviso um we would ask you to approve and we have full support from the
rco met with them and councilman greenley who's the one uh there are taxes owed on this case
okay the real estate taxes
yes it's rosalie did pay those i'm sorry madam chair quickly yes i could mention something this
is tanya sunkett um and i have reviewed the real estate um email i'm sorry website where it appears
to have a five thousand dollar and more balance old if that was actually paid we would need some
kind of information for that all right i showing i you should be able to thank you time you should
be able to see on my screen rosalie forwarded the payment receipt uh it does show i'm circling
with my course or it does show payment verification with the city's web system
of the five thousand six hundred and sixty eight dollars which was the real estate taxes right here
uh so it was paid recently so it would make sense that the computer system has not yet
updated it was paid on one day rosalie is that correct
yes rich that's correct excuse me i'm sorry it's the reporter she has not been sworn
right sorry do you swear from to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth rosalie
Name and address, please.
Rosalie Gozovsky, G-U-Z-O-F-S-K-Y, 1400 Church Road, Wincote, Pennsylvania, 19095.
Thank you.
Rosalie, do you see on your screen the courser, my courser I'm circling?
Is that your receipt that you forwarded to me that I forwarded to the board?
Correct.
Has this money been paid?
It has.
Ma'am, Jeremy, I hope that's enough for you.
let me know what else you need. But we did pay this amount. I'm sorry. This is Tanya. Again,
thank you very kindly. That does satisfy the real estate taxes. Thank you. Okay, great.
Planning Commission. Good afternoon, Chair. Peter Bernard for the Planning Commission.
This property is indicated for commercial mixed use in the comprehensive plan.
We feel the applicant has demonstrated sufficient hardship and that the proposal is consistent with the adjacent properties.
Accordingly, we have no objection to the granting of the variance.
Thank you very much. Is there anyone in the virtual audience who would like to speak on this case?
Madam Chair, we have Ms. Holmberg. She's been unmuted. Please unmute yourself and wait for Madam Chair.
Hello?
Ms. Holmberg?
Holberg.
Can you put your name and address on the record, please?
Teresa Holberg, H-O-B as in boy, E-R-G as in girl.
And your address?
Uh, 2416 Peratt Street.
Thank you. And that's in Philadelphia?
Okay. Do you swear or affirm to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
I do. Okay, you may proceed. Yeah, we're in full support of this. I would only like to add
that we have the proviso. Who is we? Are you representing? I represent the, I am a zoning
co-chair. Okay. For the Fairmount Civic Association. Okay, great. And we did put a
proviso on our support letter that if they have not already done this, that they restore access
us to the alleyway to the adorning property owner. We did do that. We actually, Rosalie,
I can ask Rosalie to just state, did she remove, and I'm trying to find the RCO wire, sorry.
Did you remove the fence from the rear to restore access to the easement? The door and gate was
removed and now there was total access to the back of the property. Okay. And we also repaired
okay and we also repaired um the neighbor's bricks
the neighbor's bricks.
with her permission thank you does the board have any additional questions no no
calendar number 1240 2928 poplar street my vote is yes with the ground floor use limited to
professional office. Yes, Reproviso. Yes, Reproviso. Yes, Reproviso.
Thank you. Okay, confessor.
Okay, calendar number MI 2021 001272 4744-46 Market Street.
We have Tony Forte that's been promoted to panelists.
Hello, good afternoon. Can you hear me?
Good afternoon. Are you the attorney representing this matter?
Yes, I am.
Can you please identify yourself for the record, name and address for the record, spell your first and last name?
Yes, my name is Tony Fort, F-O-R-T-E.
Excuse me, I'm sorry.
Tony Fort, F-O-R-T-E, with the law firm of Saul Ewing, located at 1500 Market Street, Philadelphia, PA, 19102.
And I'm the attorney for the Community College of Philadelphia.
And you swear our firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Okay. Do you agree to waive the reading of his refusal and stipulate to the tag person?
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 prior to this hearing?
Yes, I did. All of that was sent last week.
Also, have you met with the RCO and have a letter?
Yes, we did, and that was included in our submission package.
Thank you. Please proceed.
Okay, let me see if I can share my screen here.
There, can you see my screen?
Okay, great.
So this application involves signage for the Community College of Philadelphia's new Career and Advanced Technology Center, or CATC for short, which is located at 48th and Market Street in Philadelphia.
That project is already fully approved and is currently under construction.
Before I provide an overview of the variance request, however, I'd just like to quickly go through the materials that we submitted previously.
So if you look here, this is just the index of all of the documents that we submitted last week.
and I would ask that all of these documents be added to the record for this case.
So this is, as I said, a property at 48th and Market Streets, and you can see here an aerial
photo of the location in West Philadelphia. The CATC's mission is to provide workforce education
and community engagement for the city of Philadelphia. Students will be taught
automotive technologies, workforce, and economic innovation. There's also going to be CCP's
pre-college STEM academy, which draws students from nearby public schools. And then the center
will also have meeting facilities for local community and non-profit organizations.
Just to give you a little overview, this is again the site plan for the building and if at the top
is what you see in red there are the locations of the three signs in question. At the top is
Market Street where the L also runs down the street. On the left there you'll see 48th Street
side has a sign and then at the bottom is Ludlow Street and that's another sign there
another sign there and that's the main entrance for the building.
and that's the main entrance for the building.
Just to go over the refusal real briefly you'll see that bottom line the signs that are being
proposed are larger in square footage than the code would allow and they are higher
than the second floor windowsill which has led to the refusals. I want to explain though that
you know, the zoning code provisions regarding these signs are generally aimed toward commercial
signs. But what is being done here is for a public institution. And the signs are not your typical
signs. They're really incorporated into the architecture of the building and are intended
to be an integral part of the design of the building. And there are some good precedents
for this. These are some photos of art museums and public libraries and other nonprofit institutions
around the world where the sign itself, the name of the institution, is incorporated into the design
of the architecture. And that is what we have here for the CATC project.
um and another reason for the large sign here is that this is uh meant to be a real community
landmark um it's our college it's the community college of philadelphia and we want this building
to become a landmark an institution that all philadelphians can take pride in so the design
the building really is a beacon for education and learning. Finally I would add there's another
reason for the large graphic nature of the signs and that is that the site's in a bit of a difficult
location. The one side this is showing the Market Street side is right up against the L
and that large sign is intended to be visible to people who as soon as they exit the L stop about
block away. Along 48th Street side you can also see the sign on that side of the building in this
image and there you have busy traffic going in both directions and people may be needing to find
this for the first time and not be familiar with where it is and so the large sign really helps
people to see it quickly and understand that they have reached the location and then finally
this is the Ludlow Street side and you can see here that that's the main entrance of the building
and there's another architectural sign on that side as well and again it helps people find where
the entrance to the building is it's a little bit of a different difficult corner that people have
to turn there so the sign will help with that. A final point I would make is that often when
you're dealing with sign concerns in neighborhoods. The issues raised have to do with illumination and
brightness and potential glare on people's homes. I'd like to point out that none of these signs are
internally illuminated. On the two sides, if you look here on Market Street and 48th Street,
those signs are actually decal letters that are placed on the inside of the glass.
And so there's no lighting to them at all other than the light that comes through the windows
from the inside of the building. And then on the Ludlow Street sign, those are metal panels,
metal letters that are attached to a screen mesh. And again, those letters are not internally
illuminated themselves. So these signs don't produce any brightness that would impact the
neighbors at all. We did present this sign package to the neighbors, the RCO at the Walnut Hill Civic
Association. They were extremely supportive and then very complimentary of the design. I think
it's really going to be a beautiful addition to the neighborhood. And with that, I'll just
conclude the presentation, but we do have a team of people here from both CCP and also from the
architecture firm that can answer any questions that you might have. Thank you. Yep, we did
receive that letter from the community group. Does the board have any questions? No. Okay.
Is there anyone else here in this matter that would like to speak in regards to this?
from the public
i see no handshare okay planning commission
good afternoon board peter bernard for the planning commission
thank you this property is indicated for commercial mixed use in the comprehensive plan
This property is indicated for commercial mixed use in the Comprehensive Plan.
we have no objections
We have no objections to the granting of the variance.
Thank you.
Calendar number MI 2021-001-272-4744-46 Market Street.
My vote is yes.
My vote is yes.
My vote is yes.
Good luck.
Thank you very much.
You're welcome.
So next one up, it's MI 2021-001-269-5141 Walnut Street.
Mr. Bertull is coming in as a panelist.
Thank you.
Good afternoon.
Good afternoon, sir.
Can you please identify yourself for the record?
spell your first and last? Yes, Steve Bertil, B-E-R-T-I-L, Claire Harrison Harvey in Bransburg,
1835 Market Street, Suite 1400, Philadelphia PA, 19138. And can you sort of affirm or tell the
truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? Yes. Do you agree to waive the reading of its
refusal and stipulate to attackers? Yes. Also, 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 prior to this hearing? Yeah, we submitted our packet last week. Thank you.
Have you met with the RCO and have a letter? Yes, we do. We have a letter of support as well.
Yep. We got that. Thank you. Please proceed. Thank you. As stated, my name is Steve Bertil.
we're here for 5141 Walnut Street. With me I have the applicant Justin Turkus. The property
in question as you can see here is zoned as CMX4. Its main frontage is on Walnut Street between
52nd Street and 51st Street you can see here. Here's just an aerial to orient everyone
of the block that we're referring to.
This little red dot is the property in question.
This is a change of use application.
Council, do you have a, sorry to interrupt you,
you got anything to show, share your plans?
Oh, I'm sorry, you're not seeing my screen?
No, we're not.
Oh, apologies.
No problem.
I thought it was sharing.
Let me try that again.
Are you seeing it now?
Okay, great.
Sorry about that.
I'll back up a little bit.
The property in question is 5141 Walnut Street.
Main frontage, primary frontage on Walnut Street is situated between 51st and 52nd Street.
As you can see here, the property is going to CMX4 as the entire block clustered and all the
properties across the street. Here's the area I was referring to, so you can get a sense of the
context of the block. As you can see, it's commercial in nature, and the property highlighted
in red is our specific property. What we're here for is a change of use application.
We're seeking a variance to allow for a commercial use on the ground floor as a
body art and tattoo studio for appointment only. This is the property in question here.
It's the main frontage. The ground floor is already zoned as commercial generally,
but we're seeking a specific use that we received a refusal for, which I'll get into why in a second.
Just to get a sense of the context, as you can see, this is looking down Walnut.
As you can see on both sides of the street, it's commercial in nature.
That's looking towards 52nd, and this is looking towards 51st.
And so what we're proposing in the state is a body art studio for use as a tattoo parlor
on the ground floor.
The reason we received a referral, or excuse me, a refusal, is because the use of body
art service under personal services is listed as a regulated use within the zoning code.
or I should say was listed as a regulated use within the zoning code at the time of
our application. Since we were issued the refusal
Since we were issued the refusal, the proposed use of body art studios has been removed from the regulated use.
For those who are familiar with the regulated use list, it includes things like an adult movie theater, adult bookstores, check cash in places, adult spas, gun shops, things of that nature.
I believe City Council and my understanding the Planning Commission understands that the inclusion of Body Art Studio as a regulated use in the past is sort of antiquated and outdated and the stigma tied along with tattoos has changed in society and thus believe it's appropriate for that to be removed from that list.
But for its previous inclusion, as on the regulated list, this would be a by right use and we wouldn't have the referral. Essentially, the applicant and the client just had bad timing. It was literally removed weeks after this appeal was filed.
And therefore, we still have to go through this process. We did meet with the community
group and obtained a letter of support. But in addition to that, we received signatures
on a petition of support from the immediate near neighbors, both on 52nd and Walnut Street.
here's just a copy of that petition
and uh here is a copy of the letter of support from walnut hill community association
all your disposal or your waste and all that will be uh like commercial uh i'm pretty sure i'm sorry
can you say that again i can hear uh uh any waste that you guys will create will it be uh commercial
right yes so the um if you can the uh and i'll i'll have my client testify to this as well
um once i call him but they they have he's contracting with a waste removal company
um that will remove the waste that's tied to the needles and things of that nature
um it's similar to the companies that if you go to a dentist's office anything like that you'll
see they have those waste removal baskets that they have private contracts with companies that
come and takes that out um so it's not hours of operation i'll be part of the public um trash system
hours of operation i'm sorry your hours of operation those hours of operation i believe
um and i'll have them confirm this but i believe there'll be nine um to five like any normal office
operations and i should say it's appointment only um this is this studio would be strictly
appointment only is no walk-ins um as you can see from i'll show you the
sort of key plan the space is only about 575 square feet and therefore it is you know there's
only there's only space for sort of one technician and artist and um one appointment at a time okay
does the board have any questions no no do anyone else here that want to speak in this matter
uh if the board will allow i just want to uh call justin to adopt and affirm my testimony
yeah you can bring him up justin if you could just raise your hand
he's been unmuted he just has to immune himself to speak thank you justin can you please identify
yourself for the record name and address for your first and last name yep my name is justin turkus
T-U-R-K-U-S. My address is 5040 Florence Avenue, Apartment 3. Fill up your PA-19143.
Thank you. So are you firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, for nothing but the truth?
Yes, sir.
Thank you. Mr. Bertil, you may proceed.
Thank you very much. Justin, did you hear the testimony that I provided to the board this afternoon?
Yes, I did.
Could you confirm the truth of my testimony and would you adopt it as your own?
Yes, I did.
Thank you very much. That's all I have.
Thank you. Anyone else in this matter?
I see no more hands, Chair.
Thank you. Board has any questions?
Planning Commission?
Good afternoon, Chair. Peter Bernard for the Planning Commission.
This property is indicated for commercial mixed use in the comprehensive plan.
We support the granting of the special exemption.
Thank you.
calendar number mi 2021-001-269-5141 walnuts street my vote is yes
my vote is yes my vote is yes good luck thank you very much
next one up mi 2021-001
Next one up, MI 2021-001-242-6000-Lanke Hill and Pike.
Sharon, is this a continuance?
Hi, Chair, this is Tanya Sunkin.
If I could state that this here was discussed earlier,
and officially you would need to continue it on the record
for an accelerated
continuance date.
Which will be determined?
Yes, it will be determined.
So calendar number...
No, I'm saying thank you, Tanya.
Calendar number 2021-001-242-6000
Lankill Pike will be continued
to date to be determined.
Thank you. Next one up. It's MI 2021-001-255-879-85 North 40th Street. Attorney is Joe Consul.
Mr. Consul has been promoted to panelist.
Thank you.
Hello.
Mr. Counsel, good afternoon. Please identify yourself for the record.
Joe Consul, Consul Madison, LLP, 1 West 3rd Street, Suite 204, Media, Pennsylvania, 19063.
Thank you. So are you affirmed to tell the truth, the whole truth, for nothing but the truth?
Thank you. You agree to waive the reading of its refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
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 prior to this
hearing i have thank you have you met with the rco and have a letter yes okay please proceed
good afternoon board joe consul here uh for 877 and 879 through 885 north 40th street uh this
block of 40th Street between Ogden Street and Westminster Avenue right near the 40th Street
Bridge. I'm going to try to bring over a picture of the block here so you guys can see what I'm
talking about. It's in the city's Manitoba neighborhood. The bridge is right at the end
of this block. Goes over the train tracks. The two parcels are owned by 879 North 40th Street, LLC
and German Yakubov is here as representative of the owner. This is a collection. I'll scan down
to the photo here. It's two long-bloated properties. These are purchased at separate times
by the owner, 879 North 40th. The larger parcel, which is technically 879 through 85 North 40th,
was purchased in 2018 and the smaller parcel, which is 877, was purchased in 2019. The applicant
is seeking to combine the two parcels into one 7,000 square foot lot. It's a zoned RM1.
Some of our pictures. Here's some of the plans. The previous uses of the property were auto repair
and car storage. We're going back 30 plus years here. Towards the end of its life,
according to the zoning and L&I archives, it was cited repeatedly for storage improperly of
rundown and derelict vehicles, and neither of the lots have been used in the last 30 years.
Applicant is seeking to combine the two lots into one, build a six-story building
with a total of 42 units, seven per floor, 14 bicycle spaces located inside the property.
We have two refusals, one for density, one for height, and we're here to seek approval for both.
The building will have a healthy mix of units. It's one studio apartment. It's 11 two-bedroom
units and 31-bedroom units. Each floor will have its own trash storage that the floor will have
access to. Pull that up. And the trash is going to be picked up privately three to four times a
week. There'll be a full-time maintenance person dedicated to this building on staff to address
any of the building's needs. As you saw in the original shot of the block that I put up,
this side of the block is run down and is either vacant buildings or empty lots.
We believe the applicant removing the blight and beautifying this part.
the applicant moving uh removing the blight and beautifying this this part of the neighborhood
is a benefit to the block um there's not been much or any development on this block in over 50 years
and the applicant's goal is to beautify this uh and um to that end we met with the mantua civic
association on may 27th we got near unanimous support we got uh no opposition we got two
abstaining and everyone else was in support we believe based on that meeting that the neighbors
are excited to see some development on this block additionally and we realize this is not relevant
necessarily to this meeting but the applicant has come to an agreement with the councilwoman's
office and i believe andrew goodman's here to provide affordable housing units we just wanted
to mention that excuse me this is sharon i also received an email from mr goodman saying that the
councilwoman has no opposition. Oh, great. Thanks, Sharon. And I would like to just call my client
briefly. His name's German. His hand should be on. Okay.
Please unmute yourself, sir. You're free to speak. Thank you. Good afternoon, everyone again.
Good afternoon, sir. Please identify yourself. Spell your first and last name for the
personography? Chairman Yakubov, G-E-R-M-A-N, last name's Y-A-K-U-B-O-V. You so affirm to tell the
truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? I do. Thank you. Please proceed. Thank you.
Briefly, Mr. Yakubov, did you hear my testimony? I did. To your knowledge, do you adopt it as your
own? Yes. Okay, what would you like to add, if anything? No, just that we came to an agreement
with the councilman's office to make five of the units affordable at 50% AMI, four of which
would be one bedroom units and one of which would be a two bedroom unit. And we agreed to do that
as part of a deed restriction. Thank you. Thank you. I have nothing further. Thank you. Does the
board have any questions? No. Okay. Is there anyone else here that want to speak in this matter?
i see no handshare thank you planning commission
good afternoon chair peter bernard for the planning commission
this property is indicated for multi-family residential in the comprehensive plan
and was rezoned after community-led remapping in 2017
we feel this proposal represents an overuse of the properties and there is no hardship for vacant
land accordingly we we object to the granting of the variances thank you calendar number mi 2021-001
255 879-85 through 85 north 40th street my vote is yes my vote is yes my vote is yes
and mr plaza if you wanted to go back to number one um the applicant has forwarded
the information he's confirmed and it shows that it was submitted five days in advance to the rco
mailbox and that all the required documents are included there's a re street
re street calendar number mi 2021 dash 001 625 123 re street
yes sean castanera c-a-s-t-i-n-e-i-r-a 123 reed street philadelphia pa
one nine one four seven oh sir you swear affirm to tell the truth the whole truth for nothing
but the truth yes are you an attorney i am not okay uh have you okay so you did uh she did say
Okay. Okay. Please proceed. And have you met with the RCO and have a letter?
Yes. I have a letter from the Penn Sports Civilization and Congress of the School.
Okay. Please proceed.
So my variance is for the denial of...
Do you have something that you could show us up on your screen?
Thank you.
it is also freezing um the denial was for the minimum area um the roof deck setback
and um the third floor setback um i have letters from both neighbors um there were no opposite
I have letters from both neighbors. There were no oppositions. There's only three two-story
buildings on the block. The other two are both adjacent to me, and both letters were sent in as
well. So what is it you're trying to do? A deck? I'm putting a third floor addition on
without the setback.
It's a, the property is only 36 feet long.
So putting the addition on with the setback
wouldn't have made it worth it.
So that's what the variance is for.
And there were no oppositions.
Tom, you have any questions?
The board has any questions?
Is there anyone else here in this matter?
I see no hands, Chair.
Sharon, you checked everything out is fine?
Tax compliance and everything?
I did.
I checked everything.
Thank you.
Planning Commission.
Good afternoon, Chair.
Peter Bernard for the Planning Commission.
Sorry, can I have a repeat of the address?
I just want to make sure that I'm reading the correct thing. 123 Reed Street.
There we go.
This property is indicated for single family residential on the comprehensive plan.
While we have recognized a hardship for available open space, there is no hardships
that necessitate other variances.
Accordingly, we recommend granting the variance for open space
but oppose other variances at this location.
Thank you.
Calendar number MI 2021-001625123 Reed Street.
My vote is yes.
My vote is yes.
My vote is yes.
Good luck.
Does that conclude the two o'clock?
listening, Tanya. Thank you very much. You're welcome.
I believe that concludes. Is there anyone else here that feels that we did not call their case?
I'm sorry. I was just going to check on number 11. Was that continued?
number 11 yes all righty um for something that was continued to a date certain it is
sean ward's case it was continued to august 17th at two o'clock very good so it does appear as
though we finished here okay i guess the board will take a 10 minute break is that all right
oh the chair madam chair sounds good i'm back everybody thank you for that um i'm sorry chair
if I could there is a question I believe Teresa Jones if you have a question could you put it in
the Q&A box and we could address it thank you other than that chair we're available for a break
thank you Tanya you are the best see everybody back at five
It's like 10 minutes
time. Thanks, Confessor.
I'll take it.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
It's Nina, it's my other.
Okay, I might need to talk a little bit.
Okay, I'm going to need to talk to you.
All right.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Hi, we're ready to record.
Okay, we're all ready, Vice Chair.
I'm here.
jim confessor tom yep we're here is the court reporter back i'm here okay thank you and again
thank you confessor good afternoon today i am the chair of the zoning board of adjustment
I'll be participating in today's hearing along with the Board Secretary, Confessor Plaza, and Board Members Thomas Holloman and James Snell.
Our Board Administrator is Fatina L. and Board Attorney Sharon Saleta.
Tanya Sunkett is 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 individuals, participants prior to their testimony.
Second, we'd like to advise everyone that this proceeding is being recorded and that by participating, you acknowledge your agreement to be recorded.
you acknowledge your agreement to be recorded.
This is available to the public and on the web.
This is available to the...
Third, for anyone participating by phone,
if you wish to testify,
you must raise your hand by hitting star nine,
then star six to unmute yourself.
Again, that would be hitting star nine,
then star six to unmute yourself.
To enter an appearance statement,
call 267-270-5548 and leave your email address and address of the property at issue.
The number again is 267-270-5548.
Fourth, and most importantly, the question and answer box is not for testimony.
Any comments are to be directed to Ms. Tanya Sunkett.
are there any requests for continuances
madam chair we have deborah canty please unmute yourself
i am unmuted okay hi miss canty can you put your name and address on the record
and I'll swear you in.
Deborah Canty, 441 West Roosevelt Boulevard,
Philadelphia, PA, 19120.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the whole truth
and nothing but the truth?
Which case are you here for?
My calendar number is MI-2021-000792.
and what is your
441 West Roosevelt Boulevard that is correct
and are you requesting a continuance I am and can you explain why so I participated in some of
the hearings in your previous session and I did not realize one that my documentation needed to
be in five days in advance and I think it was only sent in two or three days in advance I also did
not realize I would need to have pictures of all the fencing that I'm asked that has been installed
that I'm asking for variants for and so I am I'm not prepared to present all of that today
okay um calendar number 0792 this case will be continued and thank you madam chair this is
Sharon, I'm not sure if I missed it.
Did you read the continuances that I sent you?
No, I didn't do that yet.
For some reason, I do that backwards.
It's okay.
I thought I might have missed it.
No, but right now I will read the 330 continuances.
Calendar number MI-2021-0007981025 Arch Street.
That case is continued.
Calendar number MI-2021-000868-212 Mannheim Street.
That case is also continued.
Is there anyone else out there in the virtual audience requesting a continuance?
If so, please raise your hand.
I see no other hands, Madam Chair.
Okay. Calendar number 0798, 1025 Arch Street. Didn't we just continue that?
Yeah, we did. It's one of those days. Number two. Calendar number 0871, 1120 Morris Street.
The owner is Andrew Sciola.
If there is an attorney for this address or the owner, please raise your hand only.
I've just promoted Anthony Brutani for Tabanamo.
No, he's not.
He's not the owner.
I am the applicant.
I'm the applicant.
You're not the owner.
you're not the owner. Is the owner present? I see no hands, Madam Chair. Is Mr. Scaiola out there
in the audience? Okay, calendar number 0871. This case is continued. No, I'm here. Now you're here.
Now you're here. Okay. Can you put your name and address on the record and spell your last name?
Okay, can you put your name and address on the record?
Andrew Sciola, 1120 Morris Street. My last name is spelled S-C-I-O-L-L-A.
Okay, Madam Chair, if you can give us one minute. Fatina, can you promote him, please?
he's been promoted thank you do you swear or affirm to tell the whole truth and nothing but
the truth i do have you emailed the exhibit packet with required documents proof of ownership
tax compliance a copy of the refusal or referral photos and plans and or plans of the property
five days in advance of this hearing and have you met with the rco and do you have a letter
yes to all those questions okay thank you you may proceed is my architect anthony on
he was here before but you'll present your case okay uh we are asking for a variance on
And two matters, both the not having a setback on the third floor and also having an enlarged pilot house on on the rooftop of my home at 1120 Moore Street.
My architect is supposed to be doing this presentation with all the pictures that he has prepared, and I'm not, I don't have his presentation with me, and I just saw him on the screen, so I'm not clear where, what happened.
And I can hear you, but I am signing back in.
I hear everything you're saying.
And this is Sharon Saleta.
If your architect would like to present the exhibits
and he is still present, he can do that.
I see him as a participant with his hand raised,
but I don't...
Okay, we can promote him.
Fatina, you can promote him.
Thank you.
I'm going in now.
Thank you.
Mr. Scala, any argument in favor of this
will have to be presented by you.
Your architect can present the exhibits.
Hi, Anthony. Can you put your name and address on the record, please?
And definitely spell your last name.
My name is Anthony Brutiniti, R-U-T-T-A-N-I-T-I. I'm an architect. Address is 1432 South Broad Street,
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, 19146. Thank you. Do you swear to tell the whole truth and nothing
about the truth? I do. Okay, you may proceed. Okay, so this is an existing single-family home.
it is the existing is two stories high which um first let me
does anybody does anybody hear that um background
yes it sounds like wind wind yeah i'm indoors okay stay there
go ahead this is Morris street uh the property is located about in the middle of the block
uh and we have uh just to show you the zoning map so the um the property is located here there is
cmx at the corner uh on passionk avenue but the remainder of the block is rsa5 um excuse me this
is sharon saletta again it's the applicant who has to you can pull up the exhibits for him but
he has to present the case. Oh, okay. Go ahead, Andrew. Okay. So the request is to add a third,
a full third floor extending out to the front of the existing property without the setback
that is required, which is what the variance is needed for. In addition, as you'll see on this
image on the rooftop there will be an enlarged pilot house at the back of the
property that would allow for some some extra space Anthony if you'll go to the
sightline pictures as was presented at the RCO for East Passion Crossing which
which received a unanimous approval and the letter is attached in our in our packet um this shows
received unanimous approval and the letter is attached in our in our packet
that none of the the fourth uh the third floor or excuse me the rooftop enlarged um pilot house
will be visible from any sight lines uh on properties uh across the street on morris
or from anyone walking on the sidewalk so we're asking for a variance to allow us to have that
in large pilot house on the rooftop deck in addition to the full third floor addition that
would not have be set back uh the normal amount
and then you'll continue on any other pictures that that may help me proceed okay
you have to talk andrew then won't let me talk no i i i understand um there's information
so the one of the i believe the other variants is to increase the rooftop um which is allowed
uh to be um is it 39 feet anthony yes 39 feet three inches right okay and and we're seeking to
extend that to uh approximately 42 feet is that correct no the allowed is 38 feet we're at 39
feet three okay my apologies an extra one foot three inches in extending uh the third foot uh
floor height um on the property correct
and as you'll see in all these images what we intend to do it is a single family property we
intend to keep it a single family property uh there will be no additional units uh we just
are intending to add some extra space for a growing family we receive no objections again
as at the RCO level and we have their full support and full support of my neighbors to
follow forward with the project. We also have Councilman Squilla submitting a letter of non-opposition.
Does the board have any questions? No. No. Is there anyone in the virtual audience who would
like to testify? I see no hands, Madam Chair. Thank you. Planning Commission? This is Ron Bednar,
City Planning. Do you swear or affirm to tell the whole truth and nothing about the truth?
I do. Thank you. I'm sorry, if we could please have the spelling of your name, Mr. Bednar.
Okay, it's R-O-N, last name Bednar, B-E-D-N-A-R.
Thank you, Ms. Sunkett.
Okay, this property is indicated
for single-family residential use on the city plan.
Recommend the dequested variance be granted.
Thank you.
Calendar number 0871, 1120 Morris Street.
My vote is yes.
my vote is yes my vote is yes my vote is yes good luck calendar number 0791
1605 placid street the attorney is verne anastasio
he's coming back in as a panel
thank you
hi mr anastasio can you put your name and address on the record please
good evening madam chairman uh chairwoman uh and members of the board sorry about that
that's okay and spell your last name anastasio a-n-a-s-t-a-s-i-o 1315 walnut suite 1006 philadelphia
19107.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Have you emailed the exhibit packet with proof of ownership, tax compliance, refusal, referral,
photos under plans of the property five days in advance of this hearing, and have you met
with the RCO, and do you have a letter?
Yes, I have.
I do show here that there is a letter of support from the Roanhurst Civic Association.
You may proceed.
That's correct.
Thank you.
Please allow me to share my screen.
Pretty straightforward application. No heavy lifting here. It's a legalization of an outdoor
Pretty straightforward application.
No heavy lifting here.
deck and a side yard of existing property. My client thought, because several of her neighbors
on the very same side of the street, put a side deck in their property that she could do the same.
and it turns out that she needs zoning relief to do that.
So let me show you.
This is the house.
This is the deck.
Here's another view of the deck.
For whatever reason, my computer is slowing up these days.
Hold on, please.
it's buffering
and buffering
might be time for some new computers
but here it is
side deck
that she thought she was
legally able to
place on the side of her property
I've sent you the
the D, the tax cert
but most importantly
her neighbors met with her
the folks that showed up
supported unanimously.
Again, there are several properties on the block
that are, you know,
put these side decks out there.
This is for some nice outdoor space.
Doesn't negatively impact anyone.
Again, she's got the full support
of all her immediate neighbors.
And as a result, we're asking respectfully
for the granting of this variance.
Is there anyone here in the virtual audience to testify?
My client is.
If she can raise her hand, please.
Thank you.
Can you put your name and address on the record, please?
And spell her last name.
Maria Carrico, C-A-R-R-I-C-O, 1605 Placid Street, Philadelphia, PA, 19152.
You swear to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Okay, Vern.
Thank you, Carol.
Maria, did you hear my presentation to the board this evening?
Yes, I did.
Is it true and accurate to the best of your knowledge?
Yes, it is.
and would you support it and adopt it as your own testimony if need be yes it is thank you that's
all i have madam chair person okay thank you does the board have any questions no no no
okay planning commission uh run bednarcy planning
copies indicated for residential use on the city plan given the established block pattern
we recommend that the press of variance be running thank you calendar number two zero two one zero
zero zero seven nine one 1605 placid street my vote is yes
my vote is yes my vote is yes my vote is yes thank you all have a good evening see you next week
calendar number 0873-2217 south juniper street the attorney is richard demarco
mr demarco is coming back in as a panel okay mr demarco can you put your name and address on the
record and spell your last name yes good afternoon everybody richard demarco d-e-m-a-r-c-o 2005
market street 64 i think you're already under oath i am yes earlier do you agree to wave the
reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy i do have you emailed the exhibit
packet with proof of ownership tax compliance refusal referral photos under plans of the
property five days in advance of this hearing? And have you met with the RCO? And do you have
a letter? Yes, we have all of that. We did submit exhibits ahead of time. We have letters from
Councilman Squilla of non-opposition. We have a letter from the RCO of non-opposition.
Here on my screen, I have on the call, I have the owner, Mike Reverso Jr. with us.
Let me share my screen.
I'll briefly, very briefly go through this with you.
I'll note for you that the setback, this is for basically a third-story addition.
I'll note for you that the setback,
this is for basically a third story edition.
We only have two-dimensional variances, and I would note that we actually do set back somewhat.
We don't go back the full eight feet at the third story, but we do set back five feet.
I would argue that this is a de minimis request.
We meet all the other dimensional requirements with the exception of open area,
although we do meet the rear yard area requirements just open area is not met but
we have additional area with the roof deck which is fully compliant um the thing i wanted to show
you uh was these are the plans of we have anthony brutiniti as well if you have any questions
regarding the architectural plans right here you can see there is a five foot setback i'm showing
it i'm showing you with my courses so there is a setback but it's not late feet i would argue
that statement i'll show you there's other properties on the block that have the
same setback as a matter of fact this monstrosity is across the street
that one this one here is directly across the street so there are properties that are taking
advantage of the third story and almost all of them are not sitting back they're either
have been granted variances, pre-date changes in code.
You're saying that's on Juniper Street?
This is directly across the street on Juniper Street.
Very interesting looking property to say the least.
But anyway, there's others as well, Madam Chair.
This clearly is going on in South Philadelphia.
The neighborhood groups are supporting it
because we want people to stay in the city.
My RCO also supports this type of variance.
But again, we actually are setting back five feet, but not the full eight feet.
There's a petition from, that's the RCO, excuse me.
Sorry, I'm moving back quick here, but I'm sure you're ready to.
Not opposition from the RCO, Squilla also.
Let me just have Mike Reverso authorized as a panelist.
I'll have him adopt my testimony.
We do have a zero balance.
We did, oddly, we couldn't download.
something was not working properly with the system we have zero balance real estate taxes
are all paid but we couldn't download the tax clearance certificate specifically but
there is a zero balance he's paid all his um taxes mike are you mike are you with us
i am did you hear my testimony and is it true and accurate and you adopt it as your own testimony
Did you pay all of your real estate taxes?
And are we clear on all your taxes?
Okay, and I'm going to interject.
You jumped the gun.
Can you put your name and address on the record and spell your last name, sir?
Michael Reverso, R-I-V-E-R-S-O, 2216 South Tuniper Street, Philadelphia PA, 19148.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
based on what you've already said.
Okay, go ahead.
And thank you.
That's all, Madam Chair.
I'm showing the receipt that shows,
and you should be able to check on your end.
It should have zero balance on your location.
Planning Commission.
Ron Bednar, City Planning.
Property is indicated for residential use on the city plan,
given the established block pattern.
Recommend the request of variance be granted.
Thank you. Is there anyone in the virtual audience who would like to testify?
Madam Chair, we have Eve Miller. Please unmute yourself and wait for Madam Chair.
Yes, I'm here. My name is Miller. Can you put your name and address on the record and spell
your last name, please? Eve Miller, M-I-L-L-E-R, 2237 South Clarion. I'm concerned that the...
Excuse me one second. Do you swear or affirm to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
I do. Thank you. You may proceed. Yes, I'm concerned that the expansion in the rear yard
will impinge on neighbors on West Clarion Street, limiting their air and adding to the noise factor
and eliminating their privacy. So I'm very concerned about that expansion.
So I would just ask, Madam Chair, if this resident, her address does not line up with
subject property and appears to be speaking for other neighbors, my client circulated
subject property and appears to be speaking for other neighbors, my client circulated a petition
of all of the neighbors on the 2200 block of South Juniper that, as you see on your screen,
they all signed in favor of the application. She listed her address as 2230-something.
This property is 2217. Right. This property is 2217 Juniper, so I don't believe she has standing,
but I understand our concern.
We meet all of the other dimensional requirements.
Only the open space is violated.
We actually met the rear yard,
but we don't have any setback variances.
So this would be, we would be permitted
to go this deep anyway.
It's just an open area issue and we meet the rear yard.
So I don't, that's my comment.
I don't need to cross examine, but I would say that.
Thank you.
and thank you miss miller i'd like to say one more thing um i don't believe that any uh residents
on clarion street uh signed the petition in favor of the expansion of the rear yard
isn't clarion street two blocks away no it's a it's one block one block from juniper
okay right now i would have the same objection madam chair i don't believe this individual has
legal standing it's not impacted she's speaking for other neighbors she's pretty far away from
this problem you can see my client got a lot of signatures from his immediate neighbors who are
the ones who are yeah there's no uh signatures from clarion which adjoins this particular property
at 2217 which uh 20 the rear of 2217 faces the rear of clarion street right and that would be
the 22 in the teens your your property well i'm not going to cross as a man chair but her property
is not clearly not impacted she's speaking for other neighbors which i don't think
yeah i'm i'm speaking on behalf of other neighbors on you're not permitted
to you're not permitted to you can only speak on behalf of yourself
okay thank you thank you does the board have any questions madam chair we have no no
yes someone else um no they're not raised anymore you can go ahead
okay calendar number zero eight seven three twenty two seventeen south juniper street my
vote is yes you got a planning commission carol yes i did yeah my vote is yes my vote is yes
my vote is yes calendar number thank you six seven twenty five fourteen east allegheny avenue
the attorney is henry clinton
she's coming in now as a panelist okay mr clinton hello can you put your name and address on the
record and spell your last name yes hello madam chair henry clinton queen memorial building 1313
south 33rd street foot off epa 19146 you're over at andrews correct do you agree do you agree to
reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy? I do. Have you emailed the exhibit
packet with proof of ownership, tax compliance, refusal, or referral, photos under plans of the
property five days in advance of this hearing, and have you met with the RCO, and do you have a
letter? Yes, to all of the above. Thank you so much. You may proceed. Thank you, Madam Chair. With
me is the client, Todd Comer, and after my presentation, I'll ask if he could adopt my
testimony. Can you see my exhibit package and do any to enlarge it? We can't see it at all.
How about now? No, today's one of those days. No, not yet. All right. Can I share my screen?
No. You can share it, but we can't see it yet. Let me try this again.
It's coming up.
How about that?
We don't see it yet, but it's trying very hard.
Ms. Sunkit, do you have a suggestion?
I'm not sure.
Mr. Clinton, how about if we try turning off your video and see if that allows it to move a little quicker?
Thank you.
it seems like it's frozen for some reason i don't know why
you can try mr clinton would you like for me to um the demodem and then pre-modem oh here we go
how about that oh yeah it's coming up yes yes enlarge it
better
is that better this is good yes okay thank you madam chair thanks for your patience
so this is concerns 25 14 used allegheny today's hearing date this is my exhibit
package containing AA through A10, and I'll walk through each of the documents. My appearance
statement, the refusal. Refusal concerns a long-time chiropractic practice which occupied
the first and second floor. When the doctor who was there retired, my clients acquired the practice
from Dr. Kent, Raymond Kent, and they opened a chiropractic practice also in the neighborhood
because it's been a longstanding establishment there. But they found that they only really need
to use the first floor. Dr. Kent used the first and second floor. And from what I'm told in the
neighborhood, on occasion, he would stay and stay overnight on the second floor. So right now,
the use of the property is first and second floor a chiropractic office even though it's an RSA 5
zone it's a long time non-conforming use so what we're asking is that the first floor and basement
remain chiropractic but the second floor be a an apartment so instead of having all commercial
in this RSA 5 zoning district we're asking for basically commercial on the first floor
and then residential on the second floor.
So we're kind of returning it to what it once was,
at least 50% of that.
We have an RCO letter of support,
overwhelming support, 10 to zero.
Photographs, just to give you some perspective,
this is the property right here.
It's almost 100% lot coverage.
This is a better view of it.
It's right here.
Back in the day, it used to be, oh my God, probably 40 years ago, it used to be a funeral home,
but then was adopted into a chiropractic practice.
And across the street is the Port Richmond Savings and Loan.
Again, some more perspectives.
The entrance to the apartment would be on the side and have a separate staircase to go up to the second floor.
again just trying to give the board some perspective on the length of the property
and I also have some photographs of the interior nicely decorated chiropractic office
with examining rooms on the side entrance on the front this is in the basement you can see it is
actually already set up for two units with a common meter. And then I'll just roll through
some of the other photographs. That's on the second floor, first floor. Here are our plans.
Shrink these so you can actually see them.
basically we're going to have a bedroom in the rear two other bedrooms there and a bedroom in the
front the rest of the documents are my tax certifications the application the zoning map
I guess I could show the board this just to show you that it is all RSA 5 there, but again, this is an historical nonconforming use.
So pretty straightforward.
We're swapping out the second floor, which is commercial, chiropractic, to residential.
The deed and all the other perfunctory documents that one would submit with our zoning application.
so i'm going to end my presentation there and ask if there's any questions from the board or
from the public
does the board have any questions no no is there anyone in the virtual audience with questions
no hands at this time madam chair
No hands at this time, Madam Chair.
Madam Chair, can I have my client adopt a testimony, if you may?
Yes, you may.
Comer, C-O-M-E-R.
She's been unmuted.
Mr. Comer, can you hear me?
Sir, can you put your name and address on the record?
Yes, Todd Comer, C-O-M-E-R, 1923, Corey Lane, C-O-R-I, Lane, Bluebell, PA, 19422.
You swear or affirm to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
Thank you.
Mr. Comer, have you heard my testimony during this meeting?
If you had the opportunity to testify, would you adopt my testimony as your own and as true and correct?
yes thank you mr comer thank you thank you planning commission this is uh ron bednar city
planning while the property is currently indicated for residential use on the city plan
given the documented use history we recommend aggressive parents begin thank you are there
any other questions calendar number zero eight six seven 25 14 east allegheny avenue my vote is yes
my vote is yes my vote is yes
calendar number zero eight six five thank you 20 26 you're welcome 26 29 poplar street
that's you again Henry Clinton
does he not know that he's the next case
no it was me Madam Chair Tanya being too fast
okay hi Mr. Clinton can you put your name and address on the record and spell your last name
again. We can hear you. Yes. Thank you, Madam Chair. C-L-I-N-T-O-N, 1313 South 33rd Street,
Queen Memorial Building, Philadelphia PA, 19146. Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal
and stipulate to its accuracy? I do. Have you emailed the exhibit packet with proof of ownership
of tax compliance, refusal referral, photos and or plans of the property five days in advance of
this hearing, and have you met with the RCO, and do you have a letter? Yes, to all of the above,
but the letter from the RCO is one of opposition, and I will explain that. Okay, you may proceed.
Can I share my screen? Sure.
Is that visible, and do I need to make it bigger? Could you make it bigger?
Oh, now it's great.
Again, this is my exhibit package for today's project, 2629 Poplar Street, my table of contents containing AA through A10, which I asked to be admitted, appearance statement, refusal.
And this is pretty significant here.
This is a CMX2 property in the midst of other residential properties, which are also zoned CMX2.
And I'll show you that on the zoning map.
My client doesn't want to put commercial on the first floor, but he does want to have two residential units above.
The neighborhood and the neighbors on either side also agree that it should not be commercial on the first floor.
There's actually a half a block away, 108-unit apartment building with commercial on the first floor.
And commercial really doesn't fit well when I show you the aerial photographs of this property.
But my client is in the dilemma here, as am I.
I don't usually come before the board without community support.
But he has the opportunity to have three uses, a commercial and two above.
And what he's asking is to switch out the commercial to residential.
But the neighbors who attended the meeting by a vote of eight to three really don't want him to have three units.
They're okay with two, but not with three.
and i know some of them are probably on the call i may explain their rationale but
we're basically just we're switching out a residential for a commercial because my client
doesn't want to build commercial but if he's forced to i don't i don't know that he has any
other any other option okay uh so this is the rco letter but it's not a letter of support
it's a letter of opposition and i believe that with the center board and i have it here that i
And I have it here that I can certainly read their reasons to you if you want.
that I can certainly read their reasons to you if you want.
But let me just go ahead.
And it's for Paramount Civic Association.
Yes, Madam Chair.
So this is an aerial view of the property.
Over here is the larger apartment complex I just mentioned.
And these five houses here are all residential.
But the whole area over here is CMX2.
And this is RM1 across the street.
again another perspective from the rear and what's noteworthy is right now the building occupies
100 lock coverage and in our proposal we're providing a rear yard there's no rooftop deck
so we're giving giving open space we have no refusals for height rear yard or open space so
we're actually going to open up the back of the property with our with our project if if people
and look kindly upon it.
You just get this perspective for you.
So this is the zoning map here.
If I can just get it in place so you can see.
this is the zoning map right here so the lot is about say 68 feet and but right now there's 100
percent lot coverage so this area which is now rear yard is fully occupied again we're going
to have a rear yard that's an ample size and we meet all the requirements for open space and rear
you are. This would be the front of the building, all brick, some two bays with paneling, metal,
excuse me, standing seam metal, and on the back would be stucco. So here's a better shot of the
property. It's currently two-story, and the property to the east is set back,
and the property to the west is equal in terms of the frontage.
So the floor plan, pretty straightforward.
In the basement would be a family room and storage for the three residential units.
On the first floor, there would be one bedroom.
On the second floor, there would be two bedrooms.
and on the third floor, there would be three bedrooms.
The rest of the documents are the typical documents
what one would see in a presentation.
So basically, the question is,
can we or we permit it to switch out a commercial
for a residential in this neighborhood and in this area?
I just wanted to show you this, the zoning map.
Again, here's the property, and you can see everything CMX2 and CMX1, and then across the street is RM1.
And even in a letter from the community group, and I believe the neighbors on either side who may be on the call, they don't want commercial either.
So we're kind of caught in a voice here is we have three potential uses, one of which we don't want to do.
The neighbors don't want us to do. And instead of doing the commercial, we would rather have residential because we think that would be more appropriate in this location.
So with that, I would rest and entertain any questions from the board.
We have the architect on the line, too, if there's any architectural questions. And the client is also on the line.
Thank you. Does the board have any questions, Tom?
Yes. Yes. What is the trash disposal plan, especially for the third floor?
Right. On the trash disposal, there is obviously no rooftop deck and there's no rear deck.
And the idea was that the client would install trash compactors in the kitchen area for trash.
And then the tenants would have to bring the trash down on trash deck.
the first floor obviously has the rear yard thank you is there anyone in the virtual audience who
would like to ask questions or testify please raise your hand yes chair um theresa
Yes. Hello. Hi, Teresa, can you put your name and address on the record and spell your last name?
Hi, Teresa, can you put your name and address on the record and spell your last name?
It's Teresa Holberg, H-O-B as in boy, E-R-G as in girl.
I live at 2416 for Rock Street, and I am the zoning co-chair for Fairmount Civic Associates.
Okay, you're already sworn in.
I am earlier.
Okay, you may proceed.
Yeah, I guess the problem here, clearly, we know commercial, especially in light of COVID,
is financially difficult. And everyone agrees and understands that. And what you have here is a row
and you can see from that photo there of five residences along Poplar Street from
Chang Street over to Taney Street. The one on the corner of Taney and Poplar is a duplex,
two apartment units and the other four including subject property are all single family residential
and the concern you know it's bothersome to us on the board that we we get these fairly frequently
where applicants feel like well it's an even swap well it's not really an even swap to swap
out commercial for residential they have two different demands two different
effects on on the neighbors and we haven't heard anything really that says
why it's not feasible and i'm not talking about the owner's personal finances i'm talking about
the financial feasibility of building a duplex it can be a three-story duplex you know you can have
a duplexed unit and why it has to be three units. And we haven't seen anything about the hardship
on that. They haven't exhibited a hardship. You can do that. Quite frankly, I think the residents
would refer to single family, but they understand that's not in the card. So they would rather that
the density conform with what the zoning permits, and that would be two residential units.
can i respond to that madam chair just sure yeah the hardship miss herberg and thank you for your
direction on this matter but the hardship would be uh if he does commercial on the first
and has two residential units above we may be back in front of you the fairmount civic again
saying that our commercial is dark. We don't have anybody in there. And since we have a dark space,
can we make it residential? Now that's right next door, you know, there's going to be
commercial space on the first floor of this newly approved project. So that's a response
to your question that there is a hardship because the commercial will likely be dark. Now, my client
owns a cleaners at 23rd and Fairmount and has he's been this this property has been in his
family for many many years I know I know the neighbors are upset because it hasn't always
been kept up and they had to shovel snow and sometimes there was dirt and that was certainly
voiced and my client heard but he doesn't think commercial would work and that's why
you know the ask is is what it is well but that's not really responsive to my point
we understand you can't do commercial that that it's not feasible but that doesn't mean you can't
just build two units without the commercial no but it also doesn't mean we can't do single family
but if you're if you're allowed to have three units are you not allowed to have three units
three units one commercial and two residential then from the vantage point of you know anybody
trying to develop this property you have three uses two of which are residential if the commercial
doesn't make any sense, then why would you build it?
Madam Chair, I'm sorry. I didn't mute the participant because it was a back and forth
and the participant should be addressing the board, not the attorney.
Okay. Mr. Clinton, I have a question. I'm pointing and you can't see that I'm pointing.
There's a duplex on the corner and then there's four single families.
Yes, Madam Chair.
uh first floor there's no commercial anywhere around there not only not from taney to chang
street now and across the street as rm1 zoning and this this plot here and miss hoberg can correct me
if i'm wrong i think it's been approved for 108 apartments and commercial on the first floor
okay does the board have any additional questions uh council lady chair lady i think that the
I think that the commercial would not work there, but you really can't switch out commercial
commercial the commercial would
for residential and keep three units, since it's new construction, there's not existing
conditions, because it's going to tear the building down.
Thank you.
Do you have a response to that?
Yeah, I think I would just reiterate what I said before. There's three uses. If one use by everybody's account is just ridiculous, then why build a commercial with two above and play a game with the board and come back next year and say, you know what? We built by right the commercial and two above. Now we want to convert the commercial to residential because it doesn't make sense to have a dark space on the first floor.
but counselor when you tear the building down you have three uses existing now when you tear
the building down you have to start over again you don't have three uses once the building's
demolished no i don't have three uses now at all right i only have one use but it's the zoning
district is cmx2 so that doesn't change once i turn it down once i once it's torn down if that's
the route this takes you you still have the cmx2 zoning district and then you can build a commercial
in two that's why i say there's three uses but you're not but you're not asking to build a
commercial in two you're asking to build three residential i agree mr hollman i mean you're
absolutely right all i'm saying is uh i don't want to be duplicitous and say let's say to the client
go ahead build a commercial and then you know after you try to rent it if it doesn't rent then
we'll come back and get the residential. I'd rather just say, look, this is really a residential
block. Commercial doesn't work. Everybody agrees it doesn't work. It just doesn't make any sense
whatsoever. And that's why I took the case, even though I know there would be opposition. To me,
it makes a lot of sense. You're going to get rid of 100% occupancy. You're going to have a nice
yard in the rear. And yes, you're going to have five bedrooms. It's not a six, seven, eight
bedroom triplex and you know i just thought it was reasonable and look we can disagree
excuse me let me ask you do you think two residential work with two residential work
yeah one would work two would work sure but if he's allowed to have three uses
then that's that's really the direction we want to go
but for the three uses you would need a variance correct that's and that's why we're here yes yes
sir thank you okay does anybody have any um further questions from the virtual audience we have um
Murphy?
Yes, hello. Can you hear me?
Yes, I can. Can you put your name and address on the record and spell your last name?
Yes, Brendan Murphy, 2627 Poplar Street, Philadelphia, PA, 19130, M-U-R-P-H-Y.
Thank you. Do you swear or affirm to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
You may proceed.
thank you I think I think the concerns that I would share about this project have already been
articulated I would just like to reiterate that I am in agreement that commercial use
for the reasons already stated would be inappropriate for the surrounding
the applicant in my assessment has not proven financial hardship that would require
a three residential unit building as has just recently been mentioned there may be alternatives
with lower density. However, the plan as proposed is being positioned with both variances and both
variances only being requested. These are all two-story single-family residences as current use.
They're surrounded and in CMX2 zoning by name only. If it would be relevant to consider
similar surrounding blocks where comparable houses are zoned RFA5 surrounded by CMX2.
These properties unfortunately have been zoned CMX2 for quite some time as part of this entire
square block going back to times when other commercial properties along Girard Avenue
were being considered. If it would be relevant to the board I can elaborate but I'll ask the
question. I do have suspicions of the plans as currently drawn that specifically label no
underpinning required based on my understanding of the current depth of the property in the basement.
um based on my understanding of the current depth of the property in the basement as well as the
plans that include egress on both the front and back of the first floor if that would be relevant
to elaborate on i'd be happy to do so does the board want to hear any of that testimony
i'm okay i am too is there another witness
we have multiple chair so like at least four more
okay we can hear all four
okay we have um miss kim
miss kim you can unmute yourself yeah uh can you hear me okay yes name and address please and spell
your last name kim marino m-a-r-i-n-o 2631 poplar street philadelphia 19130
zero. Do you swear or affirm to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
I do. And I would like your testimony to be something new and different. Well, I guess it
probably won't. I'm just in agreement pretty much with everything Teresa said and with what Brendan
said. As the neighbor that's connected to this property, I also have concerns about the demo and
you know, my house being, we're only, our houses are connected to each other. There's an alley
between 2629 and 2627. So the demolition of that building will leave my house freestanding.
Right now, the house is structurally sound and my engineer is afraid that it will not remain that way
when 2629 is demolished. Okay. And I guess the other, the only other thing that I would add is
that, you know, turning this into a three-story multi-unit building, you know, from a, what has
for decades been a single-family home, you know, has the potential to bring 10 or more tenants,
you know, into what was, you know, a row of two-story single-family homes. So I guess there
isn't really anything else that I can add, you know, in addition to what the other witnesses have
Thank you very much. Another witness? Next, we have Mr. Nick.
Nick, please state your name for the record. Are you there? Can you put your name and address on
the record and spell your last name? Yes, Nick Pappas, P-A-P-P-A-S, 767 North 27th Street.
Do you swear if I'm to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
Thank you. You may proceed.
I just wanted to say that I was not able to attend the Fairmount Association meeting,
but I am in full support for a variance on this project.
Okay, thank you.
Next witness.
Mr. Terry.
Yes, hello?
Can you put your name and address on the record and spell your last name?
Terry Memos, 2626 Poplar Street, 19130, M-E-M-M-O-S.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Thank you.
You may proceed.
So I live across the street from the property at 2626 Poplar Street.
I'm full of support for the variants, me and my family.
Thank you.
Is there another witness?
Yes, Chair.
Mike, you can unmute yourself.
Yeah, hello.
Can you hear me?
Yes, I can.
Name and address on the record, please.
and spell your last name. My name is Mike Katios. My last name is K-I-T-S-I-O-S. I live at 2624
Poplar Street across the street from the property. And I am also an advocate for this variance. And
reason being is I'm familiar with developers and builders. And this builder, by right, I could be
wrong but but by right is allowed to build a commercial space on that property am i correct
is that correct yes okay so he is allowed to build a commercial space on the property
which he will do and i'm not an advocate for that but if i can choose a rent residential
space over a commercial, I do. I would prefer the residential over the commercial.
I do. I would prefer the residential over the commercial, if that makes any sense.
Thank you. Is there another witness?
Here we have Mr. Chris. Mr. Chris, please unmute yourself.
Mr. Chris, if you can hear me. Hi, put your name and address on the record and spell your last name, please.
Sure. My name is Chris Katseptis. Last name is spelled K-A-T-S-E-F-T as in Tom, I-S. My address is 2731 Reno Street.
Do you swear or affirm and affirm to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
Thank you. You may proceed.
I just want to kind of echo what the previous two or three individuals had mentioned.
Fortunately, I was not able to attend the Civic Association meeting, but I am in full
support of the variants for the three residential units.
Thank you.
Is there another witness?
Yes, we have a call-in user, call-in user 9112.
Call-in user, please unmute yourself if you wish to testify.
you just had it is it star nine to unmute hello is there somebody there calling in who would
like to testify
okay does the board have any more questions no planning commission
This is Ron Bednar, City Planning.
The property is indicated, currently indicated for mixed commercial use on the city plan.
We recommend that the requested variance be granted provided two residential units only.
thank you calendar number 0865 2629 poplar street my vote is yes with the maximum of two units
yes with proviso yes with proviso
thank you madam chair i'm dismissed uh yes
thank you calendar number zero zero three seven six one four north 12th street
is it an attorney for this case
it's it's per se the owner is Deanna Williams do we have the owner available only first
I think Deanna is the owner yes I'm not seeing her here
is nancy she was planning to be here she we um texted back and forth earlier
do you want me to see um i see that the architect is available i'm going to allow
him to speak to determine if she is with him okay
hi mr smith can you put your name and address on the record and spell your last name and then
elsewhere you in um he'll have to unmute himself
okay can you hear me now yes i can hear you can you put your name and address on the record and
spell your last name um yes my name is ian smith my last name is spelled s-m-i-t-h i'm the
architect for the job and um miss diana williams um is i think uh i think her son is available
who's a part of the ownership and uh um should be logging on i'm sorry i did not see his name
on the deed is he okay oh yeah i think she can be here i can she says i can log on if
no she's i don't know where she is right now but um sir do you swear
no she's i don't know where she is right now but um sir do you swear for him to tell the
whole truth and nothing but the truth yes i do okay so she's not around and her son
is not on the deed it's a shame um uh i'm trying to i'm trying to make sure that they're i'm trying
to get them back on we've been waiting for a little bit um communicating throughout i know
that you've been waiting for a long time if if she can't sign on she can call my cell phone i would
she's there she just texted back she is here i'm going to ask her to raise her hand okay thank you
hi diana unmute yourself i am present madam chair i've been here since 3 30 i am present
you are present present can you put your name and address on the record and spell your last
name please yes ma'am my name is deanna last name is williams w-i-l-l-i-a-m-s and good evening all
good evening do you swear for him to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth
i swear to tell the truth and nothing but the truth okay have you emailed the exhibit packet
with the required documents consisting of proof of ownership tax compliance refusal referral
photos and or plans of the property five days in advance of this hearing
and have you met with the rco and do you have a letter yes madam chair uh yes to all of the above
okay i see that there is a letter of support from the 14th ward democratic executive committee um
you'll have to present this case and your architect can show the drawings yes
I did log on from a desktop and I'm wondering if that can be made available
so I can share the drawings a little bit better okay you're actually logged on
twice here yes okay it should be identified as a desktop yes it is all
All right, cool. So, all right, I'm joining, and I'm going to share, and I'm going to mute here.
Okay, so Ms. Williams will present, and you'll share.
Thank you, Madam Chair. So the purpose for this appeal is due to the existing lot size dimensions constraints.
The existing lot size dimensions present a hardship, achieving a reasonable size dwelling to accommodate an intergenerational living arrangement.
My 87-year-old mother who is experiencing dementia is now living with me.
We reside currently at 612 North 12th Street, Philadelphia, so I have been a member of this community for over a dozen years.
uh the uh limited space use and limited access we are going to have an elevator for aging in place
living and living spaces for extended family to assist in supporting the living arrangement
required for the necessary gross floor area that exceeds the minimum 25 open space and the minimum
rear yard depth of nine of nine feet can we okay that's what we want to see and can you
continue to scroll so we can see okay that's where you are right so the lot uh where you see the green
grass this is the lot we propose to build my current residence is 612 right next door
And the first level of the townhouse would be for my mother, exclusively for her use.
And so I'm prepared to answer whatever questions you may have.
Does the board have any questions?
Is there anybody in the virtual audience who has any questions?
i do not see any um hands chair thank you planning commission
the property uh ron badner city planning this property is indicated for uh residential use
on the city plan uh we recommend the request of variance be granted thank you calendar number
0 0 3 7 6 1 4 north 12th street my vote is yes my vote is yes my vote is yes
good luck thank you very much madam chair appreciate it thank you very much
that concludes our day
that concludes our day
uh madam chair if i could request that you just make sure with the virtual audience
all matters that was should have been heard have been heard for today
yes in the virtual audience is there anyone whose matter has not been heard
Thank you, Kiley, Madam Chair.
Thank you.