Isn't that what you said?
It's a concern.
But aren't you also aware that there are right now three projects that have just been granted permits on the 200 block of Vine Street, all just to the east of this or one just to the north, where they're building the 65 feet, but those projects also don't have a cigar mosaic on their properties.
Now, isn't that correct?
Very few properties have cigar mosaics on their property.
Right. So these other properties are all doing 65 feet because that's what's permitted. And they don't have the hardship presented here of having a cigar mosaic. Isn't that correct?
That is correct. As I said, you know, I can't speak for everyone in our neighborhood, but I think most people would like to see it preserved, but with something closer to the zoning code.
code. And just one last thing. Are you aware that we are not doing demolition here? And this is not
a demolition project. You keep talking about demolition. We're preserving the mosaic.
Right. But you're demolishing the entire interior of the building. You're removing the roof. That's
demolition. Yes. I have no further questions, Mr. Chairman. Okay. Thank you. Thank you.
Next up is Gary Vernick.
for everyone's uh knowledge it is 12 10 p.m. gary vernick is next thank you mr chair yes mr gary
is all available i am now unmuted can you hear me thank you gary can you please spell your full
name, and I'll swear you in. Gary, G-A-R-Y, Vernick, V as in Victor, E-R-N-I-C case, 215-217 Vine Street.
You swear, affirm, to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth.
I certainly do. Thank you. Please proceed. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Vernick,
could you please explain to the board why you oppose the granting of this variance?
Sure. You know, I had prepared some testimony, something that Jane Golden said in her testimony kind of hit me in the stomach.
And I have the utmost respect for Jane Golden and the work that she has done in this city.
I also have the utmost respect for the Painted Bride. The Painted Bride has been a good neighbor for 40 years.
I am a near neighbor and I have resided and owned since 1978. I am completely aware of the history
of this neighborhood and I am the past president of our RCO. But Jane Golden said that murals
are a piece of our soul. They may be a part of her soul. They're not a part of mine.
We're a heritage city. In fact, as far as I understand, the only heritage city in the country. That designation is because of our history, our architecture, our culture, our independence halls and constitution centers.
it has nothing to do or very, very little to do with this Zegar mural.
And so what I really want to make clear to this Honorable Board
is that I have some questions and I think I have some answers, and I want to speak to what I
believe this matter should really be about, which is zoning, hardships, and variances.
And my first question is whether or not this development presents any legal hardship as to why zoning relief is actually necessary.
This is a zoning case of a self-imposed hardship.
This mosaic was no surprise.
I've been looking at it for the last 30 years.
It wasn't buried under some wall and unseen.
This developer purchased the building and the mosaic.
fully knowing what was involved. And as the Commonwealth Court has already ruled,
the painted bride has the right to dispose of their building and the mosaic as they see fit
and according to law. So what's the legal hardship, as Mr. Anastasio keeps asking?
So what's the legal hardship, as Mr. Anastasio keeps asking?
I sat through all of the testimony before this case was continued and since it's been continued, and I have not heard one legal hardship.
My second question, can this property be developed without the three variances?
And this has already been covered, and the answer is obviously yes.
Permit number 976829 was issued by the City of Philadelphia, and the request was granted for these townhouses without any variance.
Is it financially feasible? Is it viable without the three variants? Obviously, yes.
So again, where's the hardship?
and so what we have here as far as I'm concerned is nothing more than an excuse for enhanced
profitability due to a non-protected mosaic and the third question I have what conditions are
present on the land what's unique about the land is it's a rectangular lot it's a flat lot
It goes from Vine Street to Bodine Street to New Street.
It's not irregular.
It's not narrow.
It's not shallow.
The lot has no obstructions for building purposes.
There's nothing unique to the land that requires a variance for this builder to develop it.
And so can the property be reasonably used and developed without variances and in its current condition?
Absolutely yes. If you answer those three questions the way I do, we're talking about
a textbook case of no hardship. Textbook. It's really the definition of no hardship and no
variance. And my next question is, will the granting of the three variances alter the
essential character of this neighborhood and be detrimental to this neighborhood?
Will the variances and the proposed building have an adverse effect on the welfare of the
neighborhood? And to this, I can absolutely guarantee you the answer is yes. A request 30%
higher than allowed by the code. And as Mr. Mattione just interjected, all the other construction
on the 200 block of Vine Street and within 150 yard radius, there are five projects already
permitted, some of which are already going up by right. None exceed 65 feet. And you'll also hear
testimony as to the effects of going up not 85, but close to 100 feet on these two historic
buildings on Vine Street. And think about our heritage. Think about buildings that go back to
the Declaration of Independence. That's our heritage. That's why we're a heritage city.
But I believe that the detrimental effects of 75 units run much deeper on this neighborhood.
Their request is for 100% lot coverage, 100% to accommodate 74 or so or 75 units.
Here's the problem. Members of the board, I shouldn't even have to tell you this, but we are
a very, very old neighborhood, one of the oldest in the city. Our infrastructure is old, our water
is old, our sewers old, our electric gas, very old. 12 years ago, my wife and I built our home
at 215 Vine Street. Mr. Vernick, I'm sorry to interrupt. I appreciate your testimony, but if
you can summarize that would be helpful we're running out we're running out of time here and
i know it's important not dismissing your your passion about this but if you can summarize that
would be helpful councilman it's somewhat difficult to summarize and i asked for your indulgence
with all due respect we're talking about a building that's going to be there for a hundred
years i'd ask for another 15 minutes to talk about it if that's okay that will put us past
the 12 30 deadline i don't know if you heard it's going to be continued anyhow sir we have expert
excuse me so i think the determination oh we've got two other lawyers who still have
haven't had their chance to present so this this case will definitely be continued there's no
question about it all right so what having said that mr verney it's 12 it's 12 18 mr
All right. So having said that, Mr. Verne.
It's 12. It's 12.18, Mr. Chairman. I will definitely be done by 12.30.
I can tell you, thank you for calling me councilman today. I wish I was the councilman and not the board chair, but continue.
And so as I was saying, thank you. Our infrastructure is very, very old. All of our utilities, our water, our sewer.
And 12 years ago, my wife and I built our home at 215 Vine Street, and we asked PGW, the gas company, for an installation for a tankless water heater.
PGW could not give us the pressure necessary to run a tankless water heater because of our infrastructure.
The water company couldn't give me enough pressure to accommodate my upper floors, and water pressure pumps had to be installed to get water to the bathrooms on the upper floors.
And so you can answer the question yourself. What effect will 74 additional units have on our utilities, our infrastructure, and our quality of life? A horrible effect.
perhaps not on his building because everything's going to be new but on the rest of the neighborhood
it will be horrible what other negative effects will an 85 foot building have with 74 units
i see that the developer is calling for 10 or 12 parking spaces and perhaps that's legal under the
due to some zip car loophole so i'm not going to comment on the zip car loophole
But I do want to comment on what happens with 74 new units on the 200 block of Vine Street, and to do that, you must understand the physical setting.
New Street is a one-way street, two lanes, with parking on the south side of the street.
Vine Street's a two-way street. It's three lanes wide with parking on the north side.
Bodine Street is basically not wide enough to fit anything other than a subcompact down.
And so let's say the building goes up and at the end of the month when people are moving out
or the beginning of the month when people are moving in, where do the moving trucks park for
hours while they load and unload is it on new street which will close it down because there's
only one lane to travel or objection mr chairman i mean this is a cmx3 zone we could build there's
no limit to the number of units we could build here and you know this is really irrelevant i
mean and mr vernick to your to your point about the infrastructure i understand that most streets
in philadelphia have the same challenges so if if what is being agreed to by the community
the proposal that the community supports it's going to put the same kind of pressure on that
infrastructure as what is being proposed in this application i don't see much difference there
i see a very big difference between eight townhouse units and 74 individual units because
way. Townhouses are built, Mr. Chairman. They move in once and they move out once when they
sell the building. These apartments around here are filled by millennials that you're lucky if
you get a year out of before they get transferred, disillusioned, or go to the suburbs and get
married. And I am telling you that as somebody that's lived here for 43 years. And what I'm
telling you is that moving trucks on any of the streets surrounding this building, especially in
the morning when traffic is coming off Callahill exit of the I-95 off-ramp, will create gridlock
in our neighborhood for hours. And so I am only enunciating the standards put forth by Commonwealth
Court and the Pennsylvania Supreme Court as a standard as to the detrimental effects
that the proposed variances would have on the neighborhood. And I will tell you that
this particular proposal, that this particular building, the way it's situated, its density,
it's lack of a space for the painters the electricians the repair people
the people that come to service this building is not present
it simply isn't there we all know what contractors do they park as close to the
building as they possibly can without regard they have to empty their materials
they have to have access to their tools where do all these people go for 74 units
Where do all these people go for 74 units?
It's not provided for.
it's not provided for
it's given
Excuse me, Mr. Vernick.
Excuse me, Mr. Vernick.
I have a question.
Do you believe or think that the mural is an icon in your neighborhood?
The mural is a part of our neighborhood that some people love, some people disregard, and some people hate.
But I ask your position.
My position is this.
I've grown to love the mural. I think it's a wonderful addition to the neighborhood,
but not at the expense of the neighborhood's welfare and well-being. I live across the street,
and I am telling you that if I see three or four or five people during the course of three or four
summer months come and take a look at the mural for five minutes, it's a lot. And remember,
And remember, there's 220 other murals by Mr. Sagar throughout our city.
This is not some unique Michelangelo and the Sistine Chapel that is one of a kind.
It is not that.
Excuse me.
Excuse me.
So therefore, you support the mural in your neighborhood?
excuse me mr holliman he's testifying that against this particular project now the mural is the
mosaic is not relevant here icons are icons if in one's opinion but the icons are not the purview
of this board icon cannot be used as a legal analysis for a variance full stop period
end of story and i and i do disagree with mr anastasio's conclusions we've cited the cases
in our brief that support it such as the kid case where you had a tree line a mature tree line and
they found that that was a something possessing intrinsic value that should be justified and
allowed granting of a dimensional variance same thing here we have a mural that is iconic and
is worthy of saving and it has intrinsic value and the additional cost to save it can be
so mr chairman i'm sorry excuse me totally mr cook mr cook mr cook you're talking over other
people we're not getting your testimony all right mr vernon five minutes mr chairman all right i
just have a question for you mr vernon sure hypothetically if the board or if the developer
were to propose to build the same exact plan, but keep it to 65 foot, meaning preserving
the mosaic and not exceed 65 feet, what would your position be?
Mr. Chairman, what would your position be?
Excuse me, Gary. Hold off, Gary. Hold off. Mr. Chairman, we've already proffered that solution.
my clients were already proffered that and it was shot down
i'm asking mr vernick because he raised other issues about infrastructure
and the concerns through my office mr vernick proffered that solution already okay i didn't
know that all right thank you yep and and you and mr chairman to answer your question
if this was by right you wouldn't be hearing from me i was past president of this association for
five years and oversaw you've never seen or heard from me before let's put it that way
and there's been multiple projects that have gone up in the neighborhood if they're by right
that's what the law says it's by right i understand okay all right so let me just finish
up let's just talk about this mosaic there's been a black shroud over this mosaic every time i walk
past it for the last two and a half, three years. I actually drove through your neighborhood two
weeks ago to react and make myself with the neighborhood. You should have stopped in. We
would have had coffee. That would have not been legal for me to do. Thank you.
We wouldn't have talked about the Painted Bride. But the Painted Bride has in fact put forth
testimony that is on this record already. The Painted Bride hasn't put any testimony on this
record. They're not even a party to this case. The exhibits presented as part of my brief include
the Painted Bride's argument to the Historic Commission of the City of Philadelphia
and the Court of Commonwealth Court have all agreed that mosaic has no protection.
that mosaic has no protection we have certainly used it is 12 20 it is 12 28
We have certainly gentlemen.
mr cook just wanted to put something on the record mr chair should i finish uh mr yeah let
mr vernic finish please and then we're going to continue this case and i'll give you the date and
time. Thank you, sir. And so what I was attempting to say is that the testimony that was put forth by
the developer, Emily Smith, who testified here at the Historical Commission is part of this record
and included in the record and you can go check the actual words yourself but that the painted
bride's testimony before both commonwealth court and the historical again they're not they didn't
testify here mr chairman and they didn't testify all entered into evidence and you don't testify
before the commonwealth court that's oral argument only so there's no testimony before the commonwealth
court either. It's part of the record Mr. Chairman. Go ahead Gary. 50% of this mosaic is
be laminated. The mosaic itself is separating from the walls of the painted bride. Now maybe
that's not a big deal for some people but understand this since this mosaic went up 25 28 30 years ago
exactly what it was. This mosaic has not been cleaned, repaired, preserved, maintained in any
way. So tell me something. If this mosaic is all of a sudden so valuable, please tell me why nobody's
taken care of it for 25 years, and now it's become the focus of this whole argument concerning zoning.
Something doesn't make sense here. And what doesn't make sense is that this whole argument
concerning the nature of the mosaic is an illusion.
This developer is smart.
He submitted an agreement to you
between himself and Magic Gardens,
which he, the developer,