Thank you.
Okay, Chair.
We have 33 attendees and counting, so you can proceed as you wish.
Good morning, everyone.
My name is Bill Bergman, and I will be chairing this morning's EBA hearings.
With me is our Vice Chair, Ismail Shahid.
Present, Mr. Chairman.
Our Board Member, Thomas Holloman.
Present, Mr. Chairman.
And also, LeBaron Leonard Palmer from Development Services is going to serve as our alternate
Board Member.
Good morning, Mr. Chair.
And present also was Hillary Emerson, our attorney, and our executive director, Tanya Sunkett.
Here's our virtual format.
Be advised the proceedings are being recorded.
The video will be available by contacting tanyasunkett at phil.gov.
For the benefit of our court sonographer, we ask attorneys and witnesses to identify themselves before testifying.
If you're participating by phone and you wish to testify, press star nine to raise your hand
and star six to unmute. To enter an appearance statement, call 267-270-5548. Leave your email
and the address of the property in question. And finally, the question answer box on the screen
is now for comments or testimony. All comments should be directed to our executive director,
Tanya Sunken. Let's look at our schedule for today. Okay, let's see here. Number
one, MI 2022-004-677-7256, Saybrook. Jennifer LLC is the listed owner. We had a request for
continuings for this case. Is there anyone in the audience
from Saybrook Avenue? Jennifer, LLC.
Good morning, Chair. This is Yvette Benton.
I'll be your co-host for today. I see no hands at this time.
Okay, so
7256 Saybrook Avenue. This is the third
listing. We still don't have the documents. We told the third party they had to be here today
to request a continuance. I vote to dismiss. Thomas Holloman, my vote is to dismiss.
Ishmael Shahid, my vote is to dismiss.
Thank you.
MI 2023, 002-181-362 Claremont Avenue. That case is continued.
Number six, MI 2023, 005-07-2172 East 1st Street. That case is continued. And number nine,
MI-2023, 002-232-5162 D Street, that case is continued.
Are there any comments relative to the cases that have been continued?
I see no hands at this time, Chair.
Are there any other requests for continuances?
Chair, we have Vern Anastasio with his hand up.
mr anastasio please unmute yourself good morning mr chair morning council could you just for the
record state your name and spell please for the stenographer sure it's verne anastasio
a-n-a-s-t-a-s-i-o and i'm representing the owner uh of the uh project that i'm just about to talk
about okay good do you swear a firm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth
yes sir what case 98 55 busselton avenue
i've just been retained this week uh to put together the evidentiary exhibits and present the
uh to put together the evidentiary exhibits and present the case so if i could please get a short
continuance i'd appreciate it let's see what number is that hillary that's number 14 mr chair
that one we had no exhibits third listing all right uh so mi 2022 004 553 98 55 to 89 busselton
avenue cases continued mark must be tried next time thank you very much thank you for calling
it anytime are there any other requests for continuances
i see no additional hands at this time chair so we have a few cases that we do not have exhibits
Number seven, MI 2023, 000459, 3200 Fanshawe Street, Eugene Lasky.
This is no exhibits, second listen, less second listening.
Mr. Chair, there may have, that's the only name that we have, but there may have been a tenant.
there was an expediter involved and there may have been a tenant who was interested
um all right so 3200 fanshaw street is there anyone at all in the audience relative to that
i see no hands at this time chair so mi2023 000 459 3200 fanshaw street this is the second
listening. No one appeared last time. There was an expediter who tried to withdraw the case. I vote
to dismiss this. Thomas Holloman, my vote is to dismiss. Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is to dismiss.
Number 14. MI 2022. Oh, I'm sorry. Number 12. MI 2022-004-558-1143 West Somerset Street.
Blinda Daugherty is the owner applicant. No exhibits. This is the third listing.
Mr. Chair, this is Taylor. Sorry, I just want to note for the record that at the previous two listings, the applicant did request continuances, but we have not received a request this time, as well as no exhibits.
Thank you. Anyone in the audience?
I see no hands at this time, Chair.
Okay, so MI 2022-004-558-1143-West Somerset Street. We have no exhibits. Third listing. I vote to dismiss.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is to dismiss.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is to dismiss.
Okay. And also number 15 MI 2023, 000729-6331 to 41 Caster Avenue. This case has been withdrawn.
and also MI 2022 004-588-6336 Algard Street. This is the third listing. The owner-applicant
has indicated he would like to withdraw this. We still don't have a letter. Is Colin Shawcress
in the audience.
Chair, I see no one by that name
and there are no hands up.
Thank you.
So MI 2022-004-588-6336
Algard Street, third listing.
I vote to dismiss.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is to dismiss.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is to dismiss.
Thank you. We're going to go to our add-ons. MI 2023-003-765-1625 North 18th Street. The vote in this matter is being rescheduled to Wednesday, November 8th at 2 p.m.
we're going to start with number two mi 2023 002 188 29 17 to 21 west sedgley
dorothy hamill is the attorney there's a letter of support from strawberry manson cdc with
unenforceable provisos
dorothy hamill could you please raise your virtual hand
she's coming back in as a panelist now chair
Good morning, Mr. Chairman, members of the panel, my name is Dorothy Hamill,
Serlin, Lesser, and Benson, 123 South Broad Street, Philadelphia, 19109. I'm here presenting
on behalf of the owner of Sedgley Avenue. Just for the record, could you spell your name for
the court sonographer? Sure. H-A-M as in Mary, I-L-L, first name D-O-R-O-T-H-Y. Do you swear
a firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing
but the truth? I do.
Could you identify your client
or relationship to this property?
Client is William
He is the owner of
Rubric Management, LLC,
which is the owner of the property.
Our vice chair has just a few
questions for you.
Sure. Good morning, counsel.
Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal
and stipulate to its accuracy?
Have you emailed in all the required documents that is needed to proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing?
I did not do it five days in advance.
We only had our RCO hearing on Thursday, and we got the letter of support Monday, and I had emailed it Monday.
day, I think there were some issues with my email going through, but I believe the board has
everything. Yes. Thank you. Please proceed and share your screen.
Share your screen.
We see it. Okay. So the property is 2917
to 21 West Sedgley. This is a rendering
of the outside of the premises. Attached
is the refusal.
There were two reasons for the refusal. Let me move that over.
One is that
no more than one principal building is
permitted to be located on the property and three dwellings
is not permitted on the property.
We applied for the variance.
Here's our tax clearance, proof of ownership.
This was our, we had a meeting. This is our
information that we, the inquiry form that Strawberry
Manson requested in advance of the hearing, which we provided to them. We had, as I mentioned,
this is proof of mailing for all of the notices to the neighbors. We had our meeting, as I
mentioned, last Thursday, and the community was in support of the project with, as you mentioned,
there were a few provisos, one of which, one is there are, and I'm going to share because I had
some trouble getting my pictures, all of my pictures onto the, into the presentation. But
this is the outside of the property. And you can see there are two street trees that are located
right outside the property. The neighbors in the meeting had concerns because these trees,
you know, may not be healthy. There may be some blocking of view when you're coming down the
street or coming out of the street. We had said that we would contact the neighbor, we would
contact the city, have somebody come out, evaluate the trees, and if necessary, have the trees taken
down and more appropriate smaller street trees put in or have them trimmed back. So the project,
the proposal is there's an existing structure on the property which was previously
Used as a garage. We think that the prior owner was attempting or was planning to turn this into a residential structure because there is separate water, gas and electric. That never happened.
used as a garage.
We think that the prior owner
So the plan is there are two existing here, there are two existing properties, one building, two residential properties that have been redone and are rented.
The plan would be to turn this building into a residential property.
I've provided the plans. As you can see, the layout will be, I think this is the best layout to see.
The unit will be approximately 800 square feet.
There'll be a bedroom, laundry room, bathroom, full kitchen along the back wall, open living space, closet, and the property has, there will be lights.
there'll be windows in the front of the property three windows plus these are
existing bringing in these three lights windows excuse me are existing this
window will be put in with a new door currently the property as you can see
there is an existing this is the entrance to the garage there is a curb
cut here. The thinking is that this is not really an appropriate use. Garage is not really
an appropriate use on this street. The neighbors had raised issues along those lines of traffic
and having a car actually backing out onto the street,
which you can see here.
There's nothing over here, there's parking along here,
but West Sedgley is a fairly well-traveled street
and using the property for a garage
doesn't really seem to make sense.
This is the existing property
and the garage attached to it. This is a down view of the property from the street and
this is another view down the street. So the property would be offered for rent at a below
market rent of approximately between $9 and $9.50. We thought because it is also a ground floor
unit, it would give the opportunity for, you know, an elderly or perhaps physically challenged
person to have an opportunity to rent what would be a nice apartment and be able to stay
in the neighborhood. As I mentioned, the Neighborhood Association was in support
of the project because currently it is a, you know, it's only being used
really for the storage of, as you saw in the picture, an occasional motorcycle. It's a dark
corner along the street. So putting in
lights, having it be a
residence that would, you know, bring some life to that
corner and have activity seems to be the best use
of the property. So do you have your letter from your RCO?
Yes, it is. The letter is
in the, what's in my package here?
let me see
our mansion
apologies
it was
originally
see a lot of letters
went out
let me see
hold on I can
let me
what was the vote
Uh, it was unanimous. Okay. And, uh, again, the, uh, the trees seem to be the biggest issue. And, um, you know, we were, we're certainly open to doing whatever needs to be done, getting the city out.
it was unanimous
there was, you know, a little bit of a disagreement with respect to getting rid of the curb cut or
keeping the curb cut. Some people thought keeping getting rid of the curb cut would be better
because it would open up another parking space. Other people thought that maybe that wasn't such
a great idea because then it, you know, keeps less parking, doesn't increase parking on the street.
Why don't you bring your client on and have your testimony adopted?
He's, if you could hold on just a moment, he's having a little trouble logging in.
So let me, I'm calling him right now.
I'm just going to put, I'm just going to mute for a moment.
Thank you.