And so here I'm looking at what you did.
Your firm does a great job so everybody doesn't have to flip back and forth and try to figure out where the shadows are,
where you do a Venn diagram and you show where one shadow exceeds another.
So here you have the by right building and our original design and then the red.
Can you just quickly show that where what the red areas in the in the all the way to the right is in the Venn diagram?
Yeah. So the red area is the additional shadow that's cast by the original design over the by right design.
So you can see that the original design was actually worse than what a by right design would be.
And then I believe we have a, yes, so then this one is comparing our revised design to the potential buy-write design.
So you can see that a buy-write design is actually worse than what our new proposed design is.
And then at the different time of year, you have the summer solstice where, again, you compared the original design to the buy-write.
and again you can see that our proposed design or the original design cast a little more shadow
correct than the buy right design correct just on that back maybe 15 feet of the lot but then
with our revised design the revised design is barely cast a shadow on the neighbor's property
at all it's actually you know a much better condition for the neighbor in terms of light in
there both for the as compared to the buy right correct correct yes all right um I have no further
questions for Mr Spencer um are you done yeah I mean I just again just to really quickly reference
um I have another there are a number of other projects like including the one on Montgomery
and the one down the street but in the neighborhood where similar developments were done where
the properties the homes were turned sideways or perpendicular with a common share drive
And those are included at Exhibit 20 of my exhibit book, and I've highlighted where there are RSA 5, and there were similar refusals.
RSA 5, you have one here at 1208 and 1212 East Susquehanna, one here at 1124, 1130, I forget what the address there is, Shackamaxon.
You have some that was on Industrial and others, again, that were RSA 5, like on Brown Street, even outside this neighborhood, South 19th Street.
Okay, why don't we open up to questions from the board?
is that okay questions from the board no mr chairman
no mr church all right questions or comments from the virtual audience
i see miss mary jones with her hands up sure good morning no it's almost afternoon mary
um yes could you state your name and spell for the court reporter
um yes good morning my name is Mary Jones
Yes. Good morning. My name is Mary Jones, M-A-R-Y-J-O-N-E-S, from Council President Daryl Clark's office.
Do you swear, Fern, to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Proceed.
Yes, based on the communication from the coordinating RCO, F&A, and near neighbors that reached out to us directly, the council president is opposed to granting of this variance.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Is there anyone else in the virtual audience?
Planning commission.
I see a handshare.
I'm sorry.
It's a person by the name of Ash Kernan.
You're allowed to speak.
Hi, could you state your name, please, and spell it for the court reporter?
Yeah, good afternoon.
My name is Ash, A-S-H, Kernan, K-E-R-N-E-N.
Right.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
I do, thank you.
Are you a neighbor?
Yes, I am.
Okay, proceed.
Yes, hi, good afternoon, Chair and the Board.
Thank you for your time.
I'll keep it concise.
the the appellants briefly just stated that the primary concerns were stemming from one neighbor
and I just want to go on record and say that that in fact is not true if you look at the community
vote over 75 percent of the households that voted opposed this project and as Ms. Jones just
indicated so does the council president's office there's significant concerns about the density on
this block you've heard the arguments for so we won't we won't have to go into them but suffice
to say the plans as put forth uh make no assurances about uh the prohibition against
access to the wilt street alley which this board is as seen before and the contention and the
dangers of of putting even additional use back there um so it's it's the community's position
and particularly the neighbors that use that that this would be uh potentially burdensome on that
without a minimum proviso that they could not use that, but for that one property in the back.
And then second, I just wanted to go on, just wanted to point out that despite the purported
economic hardship and the rebuttals against that, which they just, or excuse me, in support of that,
literally directly behind this property, there are, there's a multiple, on this block in particular,
there are multiple single family flagged lots. And literally right behind this one is one that
was just recently purchased in 2020, developed as a flagged lot for a single purpose home. So
the idea that this could not be configured other than or but for five additional properties is
just simply not true on its face, evidenced by surrounding properties. And with that,
I appreciate your time. Thank you very much. Anyone else in the virtual audience?
yes chair i have mr robert wright with his hand up okay i mean i i don't want to drag this out
but i mean if i how about if i do this why don't we let robert yeah and then i'll give you two
minutes to respond is that okay yes all right say your name please and spell for the court reporter
robert wright w-r-i-g-h-t you swear for him to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the
truth i do proceed are you for the project or against it i'm against it and i am a neighbor
right sorry i've been a cold if you guys can't hear me um i'm all the way at the end of will
street i really want to just echo what ash said i'll keep it brief um they keep bringing up that
they change this for the one neighbor the one neighbor the one neighbor okay yeah i think i
think ash identified that thank you um and i i do have video you know i know that they said that
there were no issues from the fire department they said that's completely fine i have video
of fire trucks trying to come down that street not knowing how to put out a fire on that property
that they're trying to purchase and and that fire went on probably 20 minutes too long um caught the
other building on fire and they weren't able to put it out in time because the fire department
did not know how to get to it because of the world street issue so i would just like to have
that looked at a little bit okay thank you thank you very much mr wright for calling in and taking
the time is there anyone else in a virtual audience i see no more hands here so could you
take two minutes please yeah what's that can i just i'm sorry can i just make two comments a
A couple of comments. Oh, I'm sorry. Thanks. I didn't hear you for a second. So a couple. So a couple of things in terms of accessing Wilk Street.
The only reason we're accessing Wilk Street is because, you know, we're trying to we're trying to address as many concerns as we could.
So we were trying the most vocal person. I didn't say she was the only person, but she was very.
So we were the most vocal person. I didn't say she was the only person, but she was very vocal and she's our immediate neighbor, right?
It's the reason why we pulled the property away to the south and moved the drive aisle.
And that's the only thing that created the need for one lot, for one property, one home to access Will Street.
We have no problems limiting the other properties not to access Will Street.
The drive does extend all the way to the end.
And one of the reasons and one of the things that was discussed at the community meeting was now vehicles could possibly get down our drive aisle to get to Wilts Street if they can't otherwise come down Wilts Street.
If there was some form of access, we even talked about emergency access, something that could be unlocked or a panic bar or something that would allow a gate for the benefit of the community and the neighbors.
The reason they can't get back there right now to the rear of the property is because the only way to get to the rear of the property is from Wilk Street.
With this design, you'll be able to access the rear of this property from Burke Street.
Perfect.
Thank you.
Planning Commission.
Thank you, Chair Bergman, Ian Hegarty for the Philadelphia City Planning Commission.
Board members, the comprehensive plan recommends no change to the existing residential single-family zoning at this location.
um as we've seen wilt street is not on the city plan it does not carry essential utilities and
can't be used as a street frontage to enable subdivision the lot is also irregularly shaped
and deep the total lot area per unit in the proposal it's approximately 1200 square feet
as a benchmark which is commensurate with the average lot sizes in the vicinity and so the
city planning commission recommends that the board grant these variances thank you so if i could say
one thing I wanted to add with Ian right there. If Wilt was a city street, we could sub, and as
he said regarding the lot sizes, we would divide, subdivide 1330 and 1328 to have lots fronting on
Wilt, but we can't because it's not a city street. So the number of lots that we're proposing
are the same number of lots if Wilt was a city street, and then we could subdivide,
have front and back on 1330, front and back on 1328, and then 1326 R by itself.
all right thank you so as we spoke in the beginning we needed amended refusal
and hillary that'll be uh two weeks from wednesday am i right
um well we'll if we have it by then we can vote it then um it just depends on how quickly lni is
able to process the request but the request has been made all right thank you uh mr orphanages
and thanks for everyone's interest in the case we're going to move on to case number nine
okay case number nine is uh MI 2022 001308 8330 Millman Street it's a resumptive hearing
resumptive hearing uh call Primavera who is the attorney and Paul Boney please
Mr. Primavera has been promoted to panelists.
Hi, Mr. Primavera.
Could you state your name and spell for the court reporter, please?
Hi, Mr. Bonion. Mr. Chair, members of the board, hopefully you can see and hear me.
Carl. Okay.
When you say your name.
I-M-A, V-E-R-A, attorney for the applicant, David Lockhart.
Okay. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
And Mr. Boni, could you state your name and spell for the court reporter, please?
My name is Paul Boni, B as in boy, O-N-I.
Right. Do you swear for him to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do. And I represent Joan and Brooke Lau, the next to her neighbors.
Right. If I remember correctly, we're at this right now. We're at the point where you're going to present them.
One of those witnesses. Am I correct, Mr. Boney?
No. I think Mr. Primavera has one remaining witness.
Does that have a remaining witness, Carl?
No, I think given what we're trying to do to wrap this up today, and because the record is so voluminous, I think that we have pretty much gone through everything.
I guess Mr. Lockhart would be on very briefly just to get him on the record, and then we would close our case.
All right, why don't we do that?
Mr. Lockhart.
Mr. Lockhart?
Mr. Lockhart, can you meet yourself?
Hi, could you state your name and spell for the court reporter, please?
David Lockhart, L-O-C-K-A-R-D.
Right.
Do you swear for him to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
I do. Proceed, Carl. Thank you. Just very briefly. So, Mr. Lockhart, you're an attorney as well as the homeowner here. Is that correct?
And you've seen the exhibits in the packages that we've submitted, the original exhibits, the supplemental exhibits.
You own the property. You reside in the property. You're familiar with the property.
So is it your testimony today that the exhibits we've submitted, as well as the testimony that I've presented, is accurate and you would adopt it as your own?
Yes, and I do.
Now, when you bought this property, was it on the historic register?
It was not.
And after it was on the register, did you have occasion to try to find a way in conformity with zoning?
to build an addition? I tried. And what was the result of that? As we know,
you have sufficient land mass for zoning, but you now have a historic review as well, correct?
Indeed, I do. And you've heard your own architects and you've seen the exhibits which talk about the
requirements of the Historic Commission and any addition to this property would require
Historic Commission approval? Yes. So not to repeat what's been testified to, but your architect
and the exhibits submitted say that under the Secretary of the Interior Standards, which are
adopted by the Philadelphia Historic Commission, this iconic property would not allow for any
addition to the property that would change the view corridor to the public. That's my understanding.
So what you are proposing today is an addition to this house, but it can't be attached. It had to be hidden from public view so that it would meet the Historic Commission approval guidelines.
Correct.
And you've received those Historic Commission approvals for this addition that's not attached.
I have.
Now, you've, of course, been in discussions with the community association and with your near neighbor, Ms. Lau.
How many meetings or how many hours would you say have been spent directly with Ms. Lau to address her concerns, either directly yourself or with the community association?
In my house, there were four and a half to five hours with Joan Lau present.
There were other meetings with the community association on top of that.
So maybe altogether seven and a half, eight, something like that.
Over a period of four or five months, am I correct?
You are correct.
All right.
And you've, pursuant to the letter of support from the Chestnut Hill Community Association, you've agreed to a setback from the property line with Ms. Lau.
Now, you've also agreed to file a deed restriction so that this addition, which is detached, will not be occupied as a distinct unit, but will always be part of your single family dwelling occupancy.
You are correct. And also, I've added that I would not make it into any kind of visitor center as well.
All right, because there was a rumor, a suggestion that maybe this structure would be a visitor center, but that was something suggested by the community association in terms of a long term, maybe acquisition by the Philadelphia Art Museum.
But it certainly wouldn't be anything that you would want to do since this is your home.
That's correct. I have no intent to make it into a visitor center, and I will put that into a deed restriction.
And not to repeat what's been said, but we know that the historic house designed by Venturi for his mother, it's not ADA compliant, but this addition, which is not attached, will be ADA compliant to allow you to age in place and for your family to age in place?
You are correct.
All right. So at this point, you did receive or are you aware of a letter from Councilwoman Bass not opposing your application?
I am aware of that.
And you have received a copy of the Chestnut Hill Community Association as well as the Chestnut Hill Conservancy position that with the provisos that you've agreed to, that they would support this?
Yes, the Chestnut Hill Community Association had a meeting and after extensive discussion, voted to support it. I think it was about 77 or 78 percent.
voted to support it. I think it was about 77 or 78 percent were on record in favor of what I was
trying to do. All right, so I have no further questions of Mr. Lockhart. Thank you.
Mr. Boney, do you have questions? Yes, I do. Thank you. I'd like to share my screen, please.
Sure. Thank you.
okay um thank you uh mr chair is my connection okay um yeah okay thank you