It's a statement.
I mean, I guess we are, you know, we, a seven-year, seven-foot rear yard would be preferred as the adjacent property.
yeah i mean i i think you know as logan said um you know on this on this house we we we didn't go
to the 38 we went to the 31 um as we tried to you know do everything we could do to um
lessen any impacts on the, you know, on the adjacent property owners, whether they be north
or south. And I think for your house, we set, we actually set back, and let me just, I'm just
trying to find the best picture here. You're on Fair Health 1033, right? That's right. Yeah. So
this is yours here. No, no, I'm on the other side. Oh, you're on the other side. Okay. So,
So, so yours, so yours doesn't, you know, I think yours came before the code.
You don't have any setback in the front, correct?
You're right at the property line.
And so, you know, so that's, what's different than your, your house here is now you're required
to set this, you're required to set this third floor back now, eight feet.
And we have the neighbor over here that's got, you know, they've got, they, they did
the setback that was required.
So we're trying to, I guess, kind of cut the baby in the middle here
where you don't have any setback in the third.
They've got the full setback.
We pushed it back five feet so we didn't impact their front here,
which they were concerned about, and only had the two foot in the rear,
which is fairly de minimis.
So that's the tension that we've got right here is you're right here.
You don't have any setback.
They've got the full setback.
we tried to we tried to do it as good as possible uh you know in both of these situations yeah but
in the rear we have our complete second or third floor is a deck that's going to be completely
enclosed by your building an extra an additional two feet um in the rear i don't know if you have
a picture of what it looks like from yeah brett if you want to go to those context sketches this
is the house that has the second floor deck off the rear there's no there's no construction on
the one side our house would would certainly block that deck but this is the right yep yep
this is this is the house with the the no rear yard we have right we have a side yard
so they've got no rear yard we have a side yard yeah i mean so that's the other you know so you've
got nowhere to your lot is is what 40 30 it's 30 yeah so you're not you're not code complying in the
rear well it was when it was built i mean we didn't you purchased it was existing house right
yeah yeah we understand that yeah yeah all right so the difference so when you look at it an
additional two feet makes a big difference from where from from where we are yeah and your lot
line basically goes in additional eight feet back if we were if we were to provide two more feet of
rear yard that the construction would still block the second floor deck yeah yeah so you're so ma'am
you're talking about right here right this is this right here yeah i see it if we move this back
i think this is this is the two feet we would still block your entire second floor rear deck
we would still block your entire second floor rear deck, right?
right because
Because you don't have any rear yard.
Your whole – even if we're code compliant, we block the whole thing
because you don't have a rear yard.
So, I mean, that's the issue here is that even if we were code compliant,
there would be no change to your condition because there's no rear yard
and your whole thing is a deck in the back here.
You don't gain anything.
We're gaining light and feeling less closed in.
And I realize that, you know, there's not much we can do about being closed in, but I'm just expressing our.
Yeah, I understood.
We understand.
All right.
All right.
Thank you.
Anyone else to testify?
Chair, we have Barbara Lee Kruger.
Ms. Kruger, you can unmute yourself and speak now.
Afternoon, Ms. Kruger.
Please identify yourself with a record, spell your name, and provide us with your address.
I'm Barbara Lee Kruger, B-A-R-B-A-R-A, L-E-A hyphen K-R-U-G-E-R. I live at 1030 South Randolph.
We're in a firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth.
Thank you. Please proceed.
So I have a similar issue as Samantha in that I have a second floor roof deck that the extra two feet will will impact.
And I feel like, you know, that we shouldn't grant variances that have negative impact to the adjacent properties.
okay right for the architect could you just kind of show us what logan do you want to
what's the best brett go back to the the site context plan yeah okay
okay so just so real clear we're talking about in the back off yeah off the the property on the
right we're talking the rear right here right here okay that one yes okay if you can go to
the site context plan brett yep working on it this one hogan yep
right here right yep so so right there that area that's hatched
So that's the neighbor's deck. And then down below, you can see where our construction's at.
In this scenario, compared to Fair Hill Street, there would be a slight difference in terms of a two-foot reduction in our house length.
But I would argue in that scenario that the lot lines as they're drawn up, as well as the existing condition of that deck being there,
the deck does actually stick past our construction yeah so it would certainly it would certainly you
know it would allow for perhaps an additional amount of air and light to that existing second
story deck but i wouldn't venture to guess it's it's a significant amount because that that deck
also faces into a rear yard versus you know the other property that that didn't have a rear yard
so i think in this scenario it's just a virtue of where the lot lines fell for these two properties
compared to, you know, where the lot lines are drawn for the other properties. It's sort of,
you know, it varies as you go upon the blocks. Everybody has a slightly different rear yard
depth. You know, everybody has a slightly different house depth. You know, we just try to design
these somewhere in the middle of all of it, but we've got clearly several different conditions
around us. Yes, but that two feet would mean a lot to me, and I don't like the fact that it would
be a variance for a new building that impacts the existing homeowners okay anyone else like
to testify there's no hands at this time chair i think i did ask the board did the board have
any questions no no yeah i would i would just say that these we we went back and forth with um
with the community group on this um you know to try to solve this riddle of all four properties
around us um and this was this was really um by not going to 38 feet um you know we're trying
our best here to to address all the different situations around us here um that's really where
we where we came out with and we were real happy to get a letter of support and uh you know we
You know, we moved roof decks back.
We moved roof decks back.
We moved condensers back.
We moved condensers back on this.
So, you know, these roof deck configurations were actually much improved, you know, and I think should be a benefit to the immediate neighbors as well.
Logan, is there anything else you wanted to add on that?
So basically, you would have, if you went up, you'd have to shrink, if you shrank the building down two foot, right, back two feet, you would actually be going up beyond the 30, was it 31?
Yeah, correct.
that was you could go to 38 correct yeah we're seven feet below what we could do that that was
that okay that's the trade-off is the seven foot in height versus the two yeah which has been done
on that block and it's just it looks it looks and it towers over the other hound so yeah it's
extremely extremely uh narrow street i'm familiar yeah yeah so um you know all right understood uh
Planning Commission.
Good afternoon.
My name is Greg Waldman, Planning Commission staff.
Do you want me to spell my name?
Who's wearing a firearm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Please proceed.
The comprehensive plan recommends no change to the existing residential single-family zoning at this location.
the variance that is being sought by the applicant is de minimis and would likely have
no adverse impact to the surrounding community accordingly we have no objection to the granting
of the requested variance thank you mr feldman there's a one page revised for each property
uh correct within a corresponding plan change form excuse me this is sharon saletta if the
board votes to approve this mr feldman would you please send me for both properties the proviso
plans form and the revised plans as two separate pdfs and also the proviso plans form that you
submitted isn't signed if you could sign and date that please yes yes yes thank you sharon if i if
this gets approved we say revised plan but we're not approving them today are we technically yes i
i have the plans it's simply that they have to be in a form that i can stamp okay i understand now
Thank you. All right. We'll take these individually. MI 2021-0000241032 South
Randolph Street. My vote is yes with revised plan approved today. One page.
My vote is yes with Proviso. Yes with Proviso. Yes with Proviso. Yes with Proviso.
QMI 2021, that's 000025. 1032 South Randolph Street. My vote is yes with the proviso. Revised
plan one page approved today. My vote is yes with proviso. Yes with proviso. Yes with proviso.
Yes with proviso. Calendar number 0022, 1630 Page Street.
The attorney is Alan Ockamson.
Madam Vice Chair, we have Clementa Amazon.
Ms. Amazon, you're going to be promoted to panelists.
Thank you.
Hello, can you put your name and address on the record, please, and spell your last name, and then I'll swear you in?
Of course, Clementa Amazon, C-L-E-M-E-N-T-A, last name A-M-A-Z-A-N, 123 South Broad Street, Suite 1600, 19109.
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?
Yes, I do.
Have you emailed the exhibit packet with proof of ownership tax compliance,
refusal referral, plans and photos, and have you met five days in advance of this
meeting, and have you met with the RCO, and do you have a letter?
Yes, all of the above.
Thank you. You may proceed.
Thank you. May I share my screen?
okay can everyone see my screen yeah yes so again my name is come on to amazon and i will be
presenting 1630 page street and i also have my client ahmad nasrallah on the line as well
so in this packet of materials i will be going over the deed tax clearance information notice
of Appeasal, a similar project which is located on 1700 West Norris Street, the application
for appeal, maps of the area, photographs, plans and drawings, as well as a letter of
support from the 32nd Democratic Board.
from the 32nd Democratic Board, the deed, tax information, and then our notice of refusal.
So this property is actually zoned as RM1, and we are requesting to have single-room
residences.
There are currently five bedrooms, and we are looking to have single-room residences.
Again, as an RM1 property, it would have a lot more density if we were to have, for example,
a duplex with three bedrooms each.
In this matter, we only have five bedrooms, and we're keeping it down to one person per bedroom.
As I mentioned prior, there is a similar project at 1700 West Norris Street.
In here, we have the information for that project, which is actually for 11 occupants.
So this is not an odd use of a property in this particular neighborhood.
We have our application for appeal.
A map of the area.
Again, this is an RM1 property.
and if we were to use it as such, there would arguably be more density, but we're simply asking
to have five individuals, one per bedroom. Another map of the area, and we have West North to the
rear. We're on Page Street in between North 17th and North 16th. This is a picture of the front
of the property, view to the right, view to the left of Page Street, photos of the interior,
the backyard, and our plans and drawings. So as I mentioned, we have five bedrooms. There's
no basement living. So we're looking to have one person per bedroom for this particular project.
And we are happy to say that we did receive a letter of support from our RCO. My client
has a reputation in the neighborhood. He's a great neighbor. He takes pride in his work,
and he has a great sanitation plan in effect. This is a notice that we sent out for our February 25th
community meeting, as well as information about this particular hearing. We sent that out to all
112 properties, a list of the properties that were notified, and our certificate of mailing.
So with that, if I can just have my client adopt my testimony. His name is Ahmad Nasrallah.
Mr. Nasrallah, you can unmute yourself and speak now.
Hi, good afternoon.
Please identify yourself for the record, name and address.
Good afternoon.
My name is Ahmad Nasrallah.
That's A-H-M-A-D.
And last name Nasrallah, N-A-S-R-A-L-L-A.
And the property address is 1630 Page Street, Philadelphia, PA 19121.
We swear and affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth.
I do. Thank you. Please proceed, Ms. Amazon. Thank you. Ahmad, did you hear my presentation
today? Yes, I did. And is it accurate and correct? Yes, it is. And if given the opportunity,
would you adopt it as your own testimony? Yes, I would. Thank you. So with that, I'd be happy
to answer any questions that the board may have. Any questions from the board? Yes. Yes,
can you go back to the floor plans please of course
here we are and i also like to note that this is a special exception not a variance
you have five bedrooms yes we do how many baths two yes three three there's three
a half a bath
it's a full bath upstairs
so there's two upstairs
one in the front bedroom
so we have one right here
one right here and one on the first floor as well