have we got the letter i am checking i haven't found it yet okay so let's proceed
all right oh could i i'll share my screen please
so uh this application regards 1421 east columbia avenue it's located slightly
east of frankfort avenue it is actually the last portion of a large development repositioning
project uh performed by roland cassis back in the day behind this area here is a tall
warehouse that was converted into um residential here is driving down columbia avenue uh this
these were the first houses built part of that uh project and then here is the building we're
project, and then here is the building we're talking about today, 1421 East Columbia Avenue.
talking about today, 1420.
So back on April 26, 2018, we applied for and obtained a by-right zoning permit to construct
this five-story building located in the IRMX Zoning District. On floors two through four
are 16 single-family residential dwelling units. On floor one, we had approved a non-profit
residential commercial slash industrial space as required by the IRMX at equal to or less
equal to 50% of the floor area equates to about 1,266 square feet plus a five-car
parking area in the rear. So we're really here to talk about this space here.
So, as I mentioned, it's almost been three years, well, maybe two and a half years, as the project was being designed and developed.
Our owner intended to have that space run out for commercial and industrial.
He hired two brokers who worked on it for a long time and found that there was really no interest for a number of reasons.
It's too small of a space.
And as you'll see, going through these other pictures here, this block is really not conducive,
at least right here, to any commercial or industrial.
This is across the street.
These are residential homes, of course, and here's a funeral home, and here's farther
down the street.
I want to take you to the site plan.
And here's the area we're talking about right here.
this little industrial area we had here for use here on columbia avenue so again as i mentioned
marketed the property started construction at a certain point you have to make a decision what to
do move forward still with no interest we decided to then file this application seeking use variance
relief to put in one additional single family residential dwelling unit bringing the total up
to 17. The refusal says 18, which would have meant that we were proposing two units here
and that that is not the case. Here's the rendering is pretty close to what it looks
like now and here's our refusal as I indicated by not providing the commercial or industrial
use on that floor as I mentioned we did meet with Fishtown neighborhood association on
October 13th. And despite, you know, all our marketing efforts, there's just no viable use
for that. But yet the proposed use that we want to do here is to convert that space into a
residential dwelling unit is within the character and the context of the area and will cause no
adverse impacts on the public health, safety, welfare, or traffic. With that said, I'd like
for you to allow Anuj, A-N-U-J, Koshla to enter, as well as Carl Amberger, who's our architect.
So I could ask them some questions.
Gentlemen, when I recognize you, would you please identify yourself,
spell your first and last name, and I'll swear you in.
I don't have those individuals with their hands up. I do have a Patel.
Is that it?
Shreed
Patel? That's all I have.
All right, Mr. Patterson.
Yes. As an officer, the court will stipulate
that your clients would adopt your question.
And so we
met with, I should say
since I don't know if there's a letter from Fishtown, we did
meet. It was generally accepted, understood
the issues about, you know, how
it would fit in with the block.
There were a few persons, I'm not sure
where they live had raised issues insinuating that this was planned, that this was some kind
of nefarious scheme of ours or mine to never do the industrial commercial space. But that
surely is not the case. We filed supplemental submissions explaining our position and the
efforts that were done. And it's part of my record and my package. Again, you know.
and it's part of my record and my package again you know we waited two years to make the decision
and finally move forward so that's what I would have to say about that understood questions from
the board no anyone would like to testify in this case if so please raise your hand
Chair, I have a Sheree Patel
Mr. or Mrs. Patel
Ms. Patel or Mr.
I'm sorry, this is actually a note to close
I guess my computer
because I was given a calendar link
by my associate Sheree
But I don't need to say anything.
Just please give us your full name and spell it.
Anuj Khosla, A-N-U-J, Khosla, K-H-O-S-L-A.
And you swear and affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Yes, sir.
If I may, I'll just ask him to certify.
Anuj, you heard my testimony, which you agree it is true and accurate and you would adopt it?
Yours?
Okay, thank you.
Anything else to add to what I mentioned about your marketing?
Anyone else?
Here, I have Andrew Miller.
You're going to mute yourself and be sworn in?
Good afternoon, Mr. Miller.
Please identify yourself for the record.
Yes, my name is Andrew Miller, N-D-R-E-W-M-I-L-L-E-R.
My address is 1405 East Columbia Avenue here in Philadelphia, just down the block in this property.
Thank you.
Swear and affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Please proceed.
Just a couple things I wanted to say.
I'm disappointed that the FNA did not send a letter because there was quite a bit of discussion of this at that meeting.
um as as uh mr patterson alluded to a little bit there was some discussion as to when the decision
to pivot from the industrial use of that first floor space to doing it residential was made
um as well as the the issue how the issue of the by right a building it relates to all of this
one of the concerns raised that they were only given they were only by right able to build as
high as they were because of the commercial industrial space on the first floor and if it
were 100 residential there would have been different requirements there was also later in
the meeting can i interject that is not true opposite that is not true ron let him finish
okay thank you sorry um so so that was that was that was stated early early in the meeting right
towards the end of the meeting the opposite was said i don't know i don't know where the rules
of by right are so i'm i'm not an authority on that um but so that that issue was raised um the
i know that there were some photos that were given to uh the fishtown neighborhood association
that that were i would was assuming was going to be part of the letter they were sending to you
um there was framing done i believe it was i believe the picture was from june 3rd
uh and you could see that the framing was already being done as resident i'm going to
object to the relevance of interior interior framing and we can address that sustained thank
mr miller yeah so so so i my main point i guess is is the clarification of the by right
issue whether whether their their height variance would have been required for a 100 residential
building or if because at the meeting it was unclear what the the details of that by right
characteristic is okay thank you uh mr patterson yes so it was a by right meaning that it conforms
with all the dimensional requirements
of the IRMX zoning district.
Yes, you are entitled to seek a height bonus
if you add in larger spaces on the first floor.
We chose not to add a larger space
and we did not seek nor did we need a height bonus.
I'm confused by, I just don't understand
how that relates to the differential
between the industrial use and the residential use.
If this building was 100% residential when it was initially proposed, would it have needed
would it have needed a height variance for it no that's what i just said no that's that's what
a height variance for it?
No, that's what I just said.
No, that's what he said.
he's saying was by right no iphone i i'm sorry i didn't understand that those details no problem
it was a by right okay thank you anyone else no more hands thank you planning commission
good afternoon board peter bernard for the planning commission
this property is indicated for industrial mixed use in the comprehensive plan
This block is largely residential, and we do not feel the proposal will have a negative impact on the surrounding area.
Accordingly, we have no objection to the granting of the variance.
Thank you. MI 2020-001515. 1421 East Columbia Avenue. My vote is yes. There's no revised plans, are they, Ron?
No, just to add that it's a total of 17 units, not 18.
Right. My vote is yes, with the proviso, maximum 17 units.
Correct.
Yes, with proviso.
Yes, with proviso.
Yes, with proviso.
Thank you so much.
Thank you.
Thank you.
MI 2020-000302-15002 Endicott Street.
I'm here, I'm promoting Xin Jin.
Good afternoon.
Mr. Jin, I believe we swore you in earlier today?
You're still under oath.
Please identify yourself with the record.
Thank you.
Xin Jin, Z-H-E-N, last name J-I-N,
1617 John F. Kennedy Boulevard, Suite 1838,
Philadelphia PA 19103.
Here on behalf of the applicant,
the applicant is a tenant at this location. Mr. Jinn you agree to wait to read in of its refusal
and stipulate to its accuracy? I do. Also have you emailed an exhibit packet with the required
documents, proof of ownership, proof of tax compliance, copy of the refusal, photos and
plans five days prior to this hearing? I have. Have you met with the RCO and have a letter?
I do. Thank you. Please proceed. Excuse me this is Sharon Stiletta if I can interrupt for one
minute. We also have a letter from Councilman O'Neill who wrote that he is not opposed so long
as indoor seating is removed and industrial use be exclusive to baking. I'm not sure how this
proviso would work given that it's an application for a sit-down restaurant, but Mr. Jin can explain
that. I'll try to clarify in my presentation. I'm going to share with the board my exhibit packet.
So, in this exhibit packet, there is the refusal, we have both a letter from Somerton Civic
Association as well as the letter from Councilman Brian O'Neill's office, photos, plans, tax
turns, again, my client is a lease tenant, the deed, application, PIF, and the calendar
hearing.
The refusal itself is a little bit confusing because the way the examiner refused everything, what this application is, is for a bakery.
My client wants to use the CMX1 space, which is actually part of four total spaces.
It's one of the spaces within that.
as essentially a specialty bakery. She and her husband both are trained as bakers and savory
cooks. And this is going to be a specialty bakery utilizing their own ingredients, their own formulas
and their own menu. So it was refused because in the way the plans were presented, my client
indicated that they would have a space of about 800, not 100 square feet total, but that they are
looking to have the baking section here, a counter for over-the-counter takeout, and a small seating
area where the vacant area is shown here. When we explain to the community, my client's vision is
that for breakfast time there would be warm pastries and bakeries don't not necessarily
donuts actually something much more specialized in that but warm pastries available to people
that may want to buy it at the counter but sit down to eat it one of the biggest concerns for
the neighborhood is that they fought and obtained a decision against the sit-down restaurant in the
past. And their biggest fear is that because sit-down restaurant was mentioned in this refusal
that this will open the door to future use by another tenant who will come in and put
a sit-down restaurant in the space. My client is only looking for bakery. Anything that she is
My client is only looking for bakery.
Anything that she is going to have relating to the, quote, restaurant use under the code would still want to be limited to bakery and baking goods.
I don't know if that's something we can work on provisal to limit the overall use to bakery.
The limited industrial also is raised by the examiner because she is making the bakery products on site.
So that is considered a limited industrial use because you're making something on site, even if it is just cooking bakery goods.
I can show you the photographs to better show the space.
So this is actually for what is commercial nature spaces that's always been commercially used at the corner of Southampton Road and Indicott.
My client is only getting one of the spaces here.
We agreed also to remove this old rooftop sign that is not part of this application.
So it's a space.
Did we have this case with this property once before?