Ryan McAdams,
my vote is yes with proviso.
Tywin,
my vote is yes with proviso.
Thank you.
Thank you.
I think Mr. Goldberg
is going to handle the rest.
Oh, thank you. I don't want to say we appreciate that. Thank you. Mr. Goldberg, MI 2025-001-879-2044 North Hancock Street. Alex Goldberg is the attorney.
um there's a letter of support from nara square action network
the lot with lot sizes the applicant is proposing are out of character are even slightly larger than
the average lot size facing hancock and peltrop street the proposed use
The average lot size facing Hancock and Paltrow Street.
The proposed use are in conformance with the code.
The proposed four-inch setback on Paltrow Street is required due to the streets department required for front steps.
Mr. Goldberg, could you please state your name and spell it for the stenographer?
Alex Goldberg, A-L-E-X-G-O-L-D-B-E-R-G.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Could you identify your client in relationship to the property?
My client is Hector Vincente, and he's the owner of the property, and he's in the virtual audience.
Tanetta has a few questions for you. I'm sorry.
Good afternoon. Have you submitted your documents five days in advance of this hearing?
And do you waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
I do, yes.
Okay, thank you. You may share your screen and proceed with your case.
Thank you.
Okay. So we're asking for several variances here. In my opinion, they're all relatively,
you know, sort of common sense variances that are in conformance with the code. All of the uses that
we're asking for here are as of right. We're dealing with a property that is street to street
with front to John Hancock and Pailthorpe, and it's got split zoning. It's currently one large
lot. It's had a long history of an automotive use and has been in Hector's family for a very long
time you know he's chosen this time to basically cut it back into contextual pieces and do
subdivisions so that we no longer have a mixed zoning parcel so we have a parcel that's rm1 on
an rm1 block and then which is the hancock side and then we have three single family rsa5 parcels
which are proposed to be single family on the palethorpe side you can see the renderings on
screen the architect for the project is core designs and its representative mark wallace is
on the call if there's any questions about the architectural materials here's the notice of
refusal um so we're we are as it says in red relocating lot lines to create four lots from
one lot lots one two and three are the pale thorpe side those are the single family homes
and lots lot four is the duplex which is uh you know as far as use goes as of right
and that's on the hancock street side um so you can see uh on the refusal that the first one
is kind of an interesting one we were getting refusal for having a four inch setback
on the rsa five side the reason for that and mark can explain this better than i can at the end of
the presentation is because of the steps at the front of the property um they were encroaching
into the sidewalk um if the property was built you know with no setback and in order to obviously
have an adequate staircase leading from the front of the property we needed to create four more
inches of front four inches of front setback in order to accommodate those front steps it's almost
unrecognizable um you know four inches less than half a foot the next refusal is for lot area
um there are there is a lot of refusal for one of the rsa rsa 5 parcels um we're required to
have 960 square feet we only have 704 the next three refusals that you see are all having to
do with lot width of course we need 16 feet of lot width we have less than that um we have another
refusal for lot size for rsa 5 uh and then a third one down below once we get to the presentation
or the architectural materials i'll sort of give you a sense of what the average lot widths and
lot sizes are on these blocks so that you can understand that while we're getting refusals for
these de minimis uh dimensional issues uh what we're proposing to cut this one larger parcel up
into is is you know very much uh in character on the block and then the last one is we have a you
know a similar rm1 refusal for lot size okay um here is a letter from the coordinating rco my
understanding is nilda pimentel from um nscan is on is on the call um to sort of uh echo the
sentiments of her letter as well attended um you know they just wanted to make sure that as far as
the construction process goes and any potential street closures that that's managed properly which
of course you know we will do and we've already kind of had those preliminary conversations with
the RCO to make sure that they're comfortable. Here's the letter that the chairman sort of
read out. We also have a letter of non-opposition from Council Member Lozada. Aerial views. So this
black building that's flag-shaped, that's the building that we're talking about here. So you
have the Hancock duplex on this side, and then you have the three Palethorpe single families on the
Pialthorpe side. Here's the zoning map. We're cutting the parcels right at the
Here's a zoning map. We're cutting the parcels right at the change in zoning, so that RM1
parcel will have a little pan handle there. I'm not sure if that's going to be very usable space,
but we're cutting it right on the on the change in zoning so that we no longer have split zone
parcels. Here's photographs. This is the front of the property. These are both garages. As I
mentioned. This was an automotive use from Hancock and from Pellthorpe. Posting Hancock and Pellthorpe.
Here's to the right of the property and to the left on Hancock and then to the right of the
property on Pellthorpe where there's been some newer development and to the left of the property.
Here's the plans and drawings. So we're going with classic brick facades, slightly different
brick colors to make it you know a little bit more variable and architecturally interesting
cornice lines lentils um cast stone uh sort of sort of towards towards the bottom level
um really you know just sort of classy looking buildings zooming in here on the site plan
first i'll show you this is the duplex on the hancock side um the parcel is 16 feet wide
um it has an ample rear yard here's the pale thorpe side we have single family so all three
of the building structures are going to be the same but the lot size is slightly vary just because
of site conditions and the lot furthest to the left we're building in a common three foot wide
easement this was obviously one large parcel so there was no need for an emergency egress
within that one property now that we have four parcels we need to basically make sure that we
have a means of egress for all four of those parcels so that easement will serve all of them
um and that that makes this this far left parcel a little bit larger than the other ones
oh and by the way we have that going back to this page we have a we have a four inch setback on this
side let me we have that four inch setback on this side down here but again uh you really can't even
tell that's there. Here's the building elevations. Here's the floor plan for the duplex.
So the lot is now going to be 966 square feet. We have two units. You go in on the ground floor
right here. You make a left. It's a one bed, two bath with living space in the rear. We have
some living in the basement, uh, with no intention to put bedrooms down there, but, uh, we would
like to have additional living space, uh, down there as well as a utility room and washer and
dryer. Um, that, uh, building that first floor is three feet, six inches above grade. And that
basement ceiling height is eight feet, six inches. So I, by my math, that would make the basement
depth uh five feet below grade going up the stairs you have um you have another unit uh it is three
bed three bath larger larger unit uh it is approximately 1274 square feet we would have
in-unit trash storage for this unit and we would have trash storage in the rear um for the uh the
ground floor unit because they have access to the rear yard going to we also have a roof deck for
that upper unit going to the the single family which there's one floor plan but all three
buildings are identical you would go in on the front you have on the first floor an open concept
kitchen living and dining some additional living and storage space down below and then on the second
and third floors you have uh you know the bedrooms and a primary suite on the top floor as well as a
roof deck another elevation these building structures are 34 feet 10 inches to the roof line
here's the subdivision plan
our rco meeting notice we met with nscan on june 10th uh in person meeting the notice went out in
a timely fashion to 103 properties here are those mailing certificates application for appeal
here's the deeds of the property it's been in hector's family for a very very long time
and the tax clearance. With that, I'd like to ask Hector to raise his virtual hand
so I can have him adopt my testimony. Hector?
Hector Vicente is coming in as a panelist. Thank you.
You're welcome.
so al she basically had three single homes and one multi-family duplex that's right and
just one more thing while hector's getting in here i wanted to mention
i took a sort of a survey of the similar lots on the palethorpe and the hancock sides
on the hancock side i counted 17 you know of these typical size lots the average lot size was 963 and
the average lot width was 15 feet. We're proposing on the Hancock side, 966, which is like right on
the average number and 16 feet in width. For the Pailthorpe side, there were 14 parcels.
They averaged 690 square feet. So those are pretty small lots, those typical lots on the
Pailthorpe side and 14 feet wide. And our Pailthorpe lots are 872 square feet, 704 and 728
square feet and ranging between uh 14 and a half to 18 feet wide on that wider parcel with the
easement so we're really providing bigger lots than what's typical there Hector yes I'm here
hi Hector could you please state your name and spell for the stenographer my name is Hector L
Vicente could you spell please oh sure Hector H-E-C-T-O-R my middle initial is L my last name
is v as in victory i c e n t y do you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth is nothing
but the truth yes please proceed counsel hector did you hear my testimony today yes and was it
true and correct yes and do you adopt it as your own yes thank you questions from the board
yes so looking at the pale throat street side the majority of the homes are two-story
and um i just wanted to know was the sort of justification for doing three stories
and a basement yeah so you know we wanted to have ample large living spaces and um from my view of
the the block while there are two-story structures on our side and adjacent to us there's a large
multi-story property directly across the street i don't think that we're going to have any
detrimental impact on natural light because of that building structure that's that's there's one
next to us and i believe across from us um there's some newer development that's going on on the
pale thorpe street side um so yeah i mean we wanted to provide sizable single family homes
and then for the duplex um that first floor basement unit i feel like one that's a very
large one bedroom apartment like from a market standpoint it almost doesn't make sense yeah
And, like, because you've got such high ceilings in the basement,
this feels like that's a point where I would have made the argument
that you put a bedroom in the basement.
Yeah, I mean, I don't think that's the plan for Hector and Jackie.
I defer to the board.
You know, half of that space down there is basically utility space.
It's not half. It's like a third.
A third of the...
You've got a thin room that's really a bedroom without a closet,
and then you've got the whole front area that's the sitting room,
and then there's another one upstairs.
so and a bath and a full bathroom so i mean again you know i defer to the board um we'd like to be
able to make use of that space just like we would like to make use of the space on the palethorpe
side um so okay other questions
see questions from our attorney i do see you know i guess it's it's not it's not the purview i just
looked at the just looked at the photos and the issue around parking on that that block is pretty
rough um but it has nothing to do with the i think i have no issues with your plans for the most part
yeah and and the other thing about the parking is there's we have three garages we have three
curb cuts basically that we're filling in as a part of this development because there's two
garages on the palethorpe side and one on the hancock side that are going away and those curbs
WILL BE FILLED IN. IT'S NOT A ONE-TO-ONE MATCH, BUT WE ARE ADDING PUBLICLY AVAILABLE PARKING
BACK ONTO THE STREET. JUST THAT PEOPLE ARE PARKING ON THE
PAVEMENTS. ALL RIGHT.
QUESTIONS FOR OUR CHAIR, ARE YOU? NOT AT THIS TIME, MR. CHAIR.
QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM THE VIRTUAL AUDIENCE?
YES, CHAIR. THERE'S A HANDUP BY THE NAME OF NILDA PAMENTO, AND THEY WILL BE ALLOWED TO SPEAK.
Nelda?
Nelda?
Thank you.
nilda pimentel can you unmute please yes can you hear me now yes could you please state your name
is spelled for the stenographer yes my name is nilda n-i-l-d-a last name is pimentel p as in
Peter, I-M-E-N-T-E-L.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Nilda, are you a neighbor?
No, I'm the chair of the zoning committee, the RCO, coordinating RCO.
Sure, please proceed.
Thank you.
Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman and board members.
I just want to mention that in addition to the points that we listed in our explanation letter for endorsing this application, for the record, I would like the zoning board to note that the design utilizing bricks blends very well.
You know, the facade of the surrounding properties, that is something that a feature that in terms of the design and the construction materials that the folks that attended the SUNY meeting noted.
And second, that while not a primary consideration for endorsing applications, communicating and cooperating with nearby neighbors is always a good policy and crucial during the construction period.
So we always take the time to poll nearby neighbors and other groups and given that to minimize the potential dangers to pedestrians and also prevent disruptions to street parking and traffic flow and protect obviously adjacent properties from potential damage.
We made a request. We were very emphatic about making sure that the property owner communicates with one of the largest multi-service organizations that we have in the neighborhood, which is right across the property under your consideration today.
the owner has agreed to make his project manager
and general contractor available
to meet with the organization
or any other neighbor
to go over his plan during the construction period
and we really appreciated that
so I just wanted to make sure that you were informed
Nilda, thank you very much for taking the time to call us
we appreciate it
is there anyone else in the virtual audience?
there are no more hands chair planning commission good afternoon chair and members of the board
michael gall but the philadelphia city planning commission the comprehensive plan recommends no
change to the split residential single family attached and residential multifamily zoning at
this location the appellant has demonstrated that there is a unique physical condition of this
property that would prevent it from being used in strict conformance with the zoning code
the proposed front yard setback and lot widths are de minimis in nature the proposed lot widths and