conformance with the zoning code. The City Planning Commission recommends the board deny the proposed
use variants for visitor accommodations. Thank you. MI 2023-007-022-367 Shares Lane,
I vote yes for a temporary variance that will expire 5-8-28. Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes
with proviso. James Schnell, my vote is yes with proviso. Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes with
proviso. Mr. Consul, we're going to move to your other two cases. Okay. So we're going to hear
two and four together. MI 2023-007-023-4421 St. David's. And number four is MI 2023-006-537-4423
St. David's. There's an opposite, a letter of opposition for the Maniac Neighbors Council.
An applicant also provided a petition in support signed by approximately 18 neighbors.
Mr. Consul, please proceed.
Joseph Consul, again, for Heather and Eric Eckley. I'm showing you on the screen 4423 and 4421 St. David's.
These properties are 465 square feet as a footprint and 479 square feet as a footprint, respectively.
These are historical properties in Maniunk that my clients purchased.
This property is very close to the 367 Shures Lane that we were just in front of the board for.
Again, this is a historical property that my clients will speak to, viewing not as a flip opportunity, but as something they could sink their teeth into and rehabilitate into two very small units that they've been using successfully, as the reviews will show, as Airbnbs.
Now, let me pull up.
Each of the variances for these two properties is because visitor accommodations is prohibited in the zoning district.
That's 4421 and 4423.
I'll go through the pictures real quick, go in the photos that we submitted.
We've got the listing here.
We've got 152 positive reviews, almost perfect rating.
Again, these two cottages kind of act, my clients will speak to it, as what they see as kind of showing an old version of Manionk that they've restored.
The bedrooms are not, as you can see, large enough to even have adequate closet space.
So one of the things we see as a hardship would be the idea that trying to convert this into a...
things we see as a hardship would be the idea that trying to convert this into a property that's for
sale being is how how tiny it is is that there really is no option for my client to rehabilitate
this property in a way that would allow for a family to to store property uh to store their
things in this as you can see it's two very tight bedrooms and i'll show you the same for
the other property. In addition to that, they spent a lot of time, money, and effort on
rehabilitating these properties and furnishing them. Now, I go through all that to say that for
each of these, we've got a different story from the Maniunk Neighborhood Council. Now,
these properties are very close to each other. They're very close to 367 Shures Lane.
However, we had two separate RCOs. The 367 Shures Lane RCO was unanimously in favor, but the Maniunk Neighborhood Council is unanimously against it.
Now, the night that we presented these properties to the Maniunk Neighborhood Council, we presented two other properties.
So it was a total of four properties, two owned by this client, two owned by a different client.
At that time, it became clear that Manuel Garcia would say no to every one of these requested variances, and they voted all four of them down.
However, the two I'm here for today had six neighbor votes in favor versus four neighbor votes in favor from my previous properties.
So while we have the council against it, we've got neighbors majority in support, which is also buoyed by the fact that we were able to get a petition that we included that has neighbors.
You know, these are not friends. These are folks up and down the blocks.
I mean, they might be friends now, but they didn't just cherry pick that there's people that are either on the same block or on the blocks right behind on either side of the property.
And so there's a ton from St. David Street itself.
I believe almost every other property from St. David Street is represented here as a petition in support of these two variances.
The other two variances that I was mentioning that did worse in front of the RCO the same night, the board saw fit to apply three-year variances to them.
So we're hoping that in the face of less severe opposition from the same RCO, from the same night of votes, that we can see a similar result tonight.
Because as you'll see, my clients have been operating these and they're very passionate about these properties.
Let's see. I'll call Heather now. Actually, just one more thing.
These are each listed as two beds, two baths. As we mentioned, they're quite tiny, but we believe, as I said, it would not operate for really any other use as well as it does for this use as kind of a way for folks to visit Maniunk.
There's not a hotel situation in this part of Philadelphia, and that appears to be a shame to me because there's a lot of walkable things and things that folks from outside town might want to come to Manioc to visit.
I'll call Heather to speak a little bit about these two properties.
Hi, Heather, could you just state your name?
You've already been sworn in.
Heather Exley
H-E-A-T-H
these two little properties
to us are very very special
they represent a lot of historic
oh there's a picture of me picking up trash
I just wanted to show Heather that they're
the smallest properties on the block
other houses have garages and three stories
and yours are not
continue um so this these properties are are just so so lovely and we feel like we saved them from
being torn down um they have two bedrooms and one bathroom they're just teeny tiny you know the
original tiny house we um also feel like we're good stewards in addition to picking up trash and
and and you know taking care of these houses i did the program with the philadelphia horticultural
society and the water department a rain check to help with storm water runoff so they share
a rain barrel um eric kindly um to me borrowed money from his 401k so that we could you know
update the finishes and have nice furniture and we have artwork from local artists.
So we also have made it a point to visit all the restaurants.
So we also have made it a point to visit all the restaurants in the neighborhood.
We are friendly with the people who run and manage the restaurants and wait staff.
And we recommend the restaurants in our Airbnb and in the profile places that we feel like are nice.
What else can I say?
You're local as well, correct, Heather?
You guys can be at these properties.
I believe you told me within 10 minutes.
10 minutes we live 10 minutes away we're friendly with the neighbors so if there's a problem
you know there hasn't been a problem uh but if neighbors need to contact us they have
they call us and and we just come right over um
so that might be it okay thank you questions from the board no chair no mr chairman
questions or comments from our attorney hillary not at this time mr chair questions or comments
from the virtual audience i see no hands planning commission thank you chair bergman and good
morning david effecta with the city planning commission chairman and board members i'm going
to put the same statement on for both 4421 and 4423, if that's okay with you? Yes. All right,
terrific. So for 4421 and 4423 St. David Street, the comprehensive plan recommends no change to
the residential single-family zoning at this location. A 2020 zoning ordinance passed by
City Council, which regulated short-term rentals, did not change the basic rule prohibiting full-time
use of a dwelling unit as a short-term rental. This type of advocacy management, where the owner
does not live in the unit, has been illegal since the first short-term rental zoning regulations
became effective in 2015. What has changed since the passage of the 2020 ordinance is that
there is now a licensing and enforcement mechanism. There is no unique physical
condition or circumstance of this property that would prevent it from being used in conformance
with the zoning code. The City Planning Commission recommends the board deny the proposed use
variants for visitor accommodations at both addresses. Thank you, David. I'm going to vote
on both of these at the same time. So MI 2023-007-023-023-4421 St. David's, and number four,
MI 2023-006-537-4423 St. David Street.
I vote yes to both for a temporary variance that will expire 5-8-28.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes with proviso on both.
James Snell, my vote is yes to both with provisos on both.
Ishmael Shahi, my vote is yes to both with provisors on both.
Thank you, counsel.
Thank you.
I believe we're up to number 15, MI 2023.
Mr. Chair, I just want to bring your attention.
We do have two add-ons that we need to vote on.
so we can i don't know if you want to do this now or wait till the end
oh can we vote on now mr chairman yeah sure i
oh yeah let's vote on them now because i understand mr holliman has a time okay fine
okay all right so mi2023-006-051-2547 north washington street
I vote yes with a proviso.
Maximum occupancy, three residents.
Thomas Solomon, my vote is yes with proviso.
James Snell, my vote is yes with proviso.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes with proviso.
Number two, MI 2023, 006-169-925 Manawana Street. I vote yes with proviso. Temporary variance expires 5-8-27.
Thomas Holliman, my vote is you.
Mr. Chair, I'm sorry. We also need proviso for the refusal.
All right. All right. So I vote yes with proviso. Her refusal dated 3-25-24. Temporary variance expires 5-8-27.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes with provisos.
James Snell, my vote is yes with provisos.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes, with proviso.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes with proviso.
Number 15, MI 2023-007-026-2780 Emerald Street.
Leo Movahill is the attorney.
There's a letter of unanimous support from Impact CDC and a letter of non-opposition received from Council Member Lozada.
Good morning, sir.
could you please state your name
and spell for the court stenographer?
Certainly.
It's Leo, L-E-O, last name Molahill.
That's M as in Michael, U-L, V as in Victor, I-H-I-L-L.
Right.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth,
the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
Could you identify your client
and relationship to the property?
My client is Adam Aloise.
Adam is the owner of the property,
owns in his own name.
And Mr. Molahill, our vice chair has a few questions.
Thank you.
Good morning, counsel. Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal or stipulate to its accuracy?
Have you emailed in all the required documents and exhibits that is needed to proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing?
Thank you, counsel. Please proceed. You have already shared your screen.
Great. So members of the board, just confirming that everyone can see my screen.
We can share.
Great. I have the pleasure to represent Adam today. He's on the line.
we're here because we're seeking to develop an empty lot at 2780 to 84 emerald street for purposes
of the record i'll review my zoning packet we have the project information form refusal and appeal
at page one area zoning maps at 10. deed at 12. zoning notice to neighbors at 16. proof of mailing
at 18. a letter of support from impact at 25. there's no commercial activity license in this
case as my client does own it under his own name. Tax clearance is at 26. Voters at 27. It plans at
42. Pardon me, members of the board. Let me fix this. So we received several refusals in this
matter, members of the board. This is a RSA 5 property, but it's in the area that's kind of
mixed. There's a number of garages in the area, a number of corner stores, and this is directly
north of uh lehigh avenue excuse me where the viaduct exists uh for the railway uh and that
specific area to put it mildly has seen some better days there's a lot of vacant lots and
plight in the area so what we're seeking to do is develop an empty lot and hope it's somewhere
that's somewhere that someone wants to move um so we receive refusals for seeking to have
multi-family on a single family lot and we'll get into that in a sec minimum rear yard depth
we're proposing five feet versus nine uh we actually had the immediate behind us property
owner at the community meeting and they have no problem with that uh and our setback which
is proposed at 14 feet to allow for pad parking versus zero which is what allowed under the zoning
code it's my class excuse me members of the board
My client's application for appeal to cycle through this pretty quickly project information form.
And let's get to the zoning map. So members of the board. Here's the lot. As you can see, it's it's really several lots wide, but it is currently one address.
And what we're seeking to do is essentially put what will look to be two buildings on there. One's going to be more or less a triplex.
The other will be more or less a single family home.
But because we're keeping it all on one lot, as indicated in this picture of page 10, we got a multifamily refusal for the entire parcel.
As you can see, there's CMX2 in the area, indicated in red here with my cursor.
There's ICMX across the street.
I believe this is currently a business that builds food trucks.
Many of these parcels that you see here are currently vacant.
These RM1 parcels are currently vacant.
This is the viaduct that I was discussing with everybody as well earlier.
And we'll see all that when I get to the photographs of the property.
Here's Lehigh Avenue. This is just a shot I took from Google Maps.
This here is the L, just to orient everybody.
This is that viaduct that I was discussing earlier.
You would take the Emerald Street Tunnel under the viaduct up Emerald Street.
And then here we are indicated with this red dot, but clients copy of the deed, indicating that they are in fact, the owner of the property.
That's my notice for the zoning meeting that went out on March 19, 2024, including a copy of the refusal.
There's a proof of mailing.
There's a proof of mailing.
There's all the addresses that it went to.
There's all the addresses that it went to.
I think we had maybe five attendees at the meeting, including the board of impact.
So it was not heavily attended.
This is the letter of support from impact.
You have received that. I'm sorry. It was total of eight attendees.
And we did receive the support from them because this development will contribute to the growth and revitalization of the neighborhood, which has a history of impoverishment over many years.
and changing vacant buildings from eyesores and tax burdens into family homes and businesses
and the expansion of current ones is what kensington and surrounding area needs the
effort adds safety beautification value and jobs to the community and we hope that this letter of