clearance. At the conclusion of my presentation, I'll ask Mr. Umann to virtually raise his hand,
be sworn in, and I'll have a few questions for him as well. Our notice of refusal. As you can
see, this is an RSA 5 property. It's a rather large lot that, let me see, it's a rather large
lot that's 1,710 square feet. Originally, we were looking to put three units in here,
but after talking with the neighborhood as well as the community group, we're agreeing to a maximum
of two units by way of provisos. We have three refusals. The first is with the roof deck access
structure. Because of how the roof deck access structure is configured on this lot, it's
technically less than five foot, it's less than the five foot set back in the rear. So that
pilot house is being considered as part of the height of the property. The community had no
objection to that. The second refusal has to do with the multifamily use. Again, they had no
objection to the multifamily use. Their objection had merely to do with instead of having three
units, they wanted two units instead. And then the third refusal, we're providing a side yard
of less than five feet. We're actually providing a side yard of three feet. And the reason why
we're doing this is to allow the residents in the building to store their trash in the rear so they
can go from back to front and front to back to store their trash as well as to move their trash
during trash day. And the neighborhood had no issue with that either. It was really just the
the amount of units and the way our building was configured, where the side alley was,
in essence. So we got a letter of support from the neighborhood based on the modifications which
we made, which is in our revised plans. But they said that they supported maximum of two units
reflected on the plans. They included our plans, which is exactly what we're showing you today.
And you'll see that. And then we made these, these are the plans we revised. And we're doing a reduction from three units to two. We inverse the building footprint. So the property owner to the left of us wanted the side yards, this three foot side yard on their side to provide them more light and air for their property. So we agreed to do that.
We also reoriented the pilot house because originally the pilot house was on one side, but once we inversed the building structure, the pilot house had to be reoriented and inversed as well.
And so we just want to acknowledge that in our revised proviso plan form.
And then finally, because we reduced the amount of units from three units to two units, we also reduced the building depth from 78 feet and 10 inches to 50 feet.
So now we have an open area of 40 feet or a setback of 40 feet in the rear.
And that was also important to the neighbors to the left of us.
They didn't want our building structure to overpower the building structure that's next to theirs.
So we reduced our building structure significantly to provide them with the necessary light and air.
so as you can see from this building permit or excuse me use permit originally this property
or at one point this property as late as 2007 was five units it got converted and downward adjusted
to three units so what we're offering as two units is not out of character to the property's
history it's also not out of character to have multi-family use on this block even though this
block is now primarily RSA 5. We see six separate instances where similar properties are multifamily
in nature, even though it's a RSA 5 block. So we have 941 North 6th Street, 951 North 6th Street,
965 North 6th Street, 975 North 6th Street, 983 North 6th Street. And we have actually two
properties on the back on Randolph, 988 North Randolph and 932 North Randolph, which are also
multifamily in nature. So this is, and these are the pictures of those properties as well for the board, 951.
So this is, and these are the pictures of those properties as well for the board. 951, 965, 975, 983. And then these are the Randolph Street properties, 988 and 932. And then again, we want to look on Atlas. It's not of character to have a side yard of less than five feet. You can also see that through our presentation.
And then maps of the area. We are across the street from CMX2 and RM1, so we're not really
that far off from what you would see as multifamily. Also on 7th Street is completely RM1.
And then photographs of the property. As you can see, this is our property, the front of it.
This is our proof of posting on the property for today's hearing. 941 North 6th Street has
been vacant for some time. It goes as far back as September of 2009. We believe it's because of
the difficulty in complying with the code to have a single-family residence on this block, which
has a pretty large multifamily presence. And then this is North 6th Street to the right of the
property and to the left of the property. And then these are our plans and drawings. Again, we
inversed our building originally this was the alley side and the door was on the other side so
we completely inversed it and this is the property owner that we've been working with on the left
who wanted us to inverse it so we have the side alley essentially um to our left and to their
right uh and again we we decreased the depth of the building structure as well at their request
and then these are just our floor plans again we have two units we have two by levels one
unit number one is on the first floor and lower level unit number two is on the second and third
floors unit one will have access to the rear yard for their outdoor space unit two will have
access to the roof deck for their outdoor space uh the meeting took place in june on june 5th
at 6 30 p.m 135 addresses were notified of the meeting listed the addresses proof of mailing to
these addresses our application for appeal that we filed on behalf of gumon properties
the notice refusal that went with it the project information form that went with that
our deeds of property showing that gumon properties llc is the owner of the property
and their certificate of tax clearance with that being said i would ask that mr gumon virtually
raise his hand and be sworn in please raise your virtual hand and wait to be sworn in
they're on mr guma please unmute yourself and please wait for the chair
hi please state your name and spell for the court stenographer
do we see him he's on but uh he's still muted he's been asked to unmute
okay sorry okay my name is my name is talvinder guman spelled as t-a-l-v like vector i-n-d-e-r
Last name is G-H-U-M-A-N.
You swear to affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Proceed, counsel.
Yes, Mr. Gouman, you heard everything I had to state today about your zoning matter.
And is it true and correct?
And do you adopt as your own testimony?
Questions from the board?
No, Chair.
no mr chairman questions or comments from the virtual audience
i do not see any further hands mr chair planning commission
this is paula bremblo burns the comprehensive plan recommends no change to the single family
residential at this location there is no hardship to the vacant land to justify the overuse of the
property with a multifamily dwelling where a large percentage of the block face is being
is currently used as single family. Accordingly, the Planning Commission recommends that the
variance does not be granted. MI 2023-001-708-941-North 6th Street. I vote yes with provisos.
Maximum two units. Revised plans, one page. Stand by ZBA, August 9th, 2023.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes, with proviso.
James Snell, my vote is yes, with proviso.
Mr. Malcolmson, you have your votes.
Mr. Nackamson, you have your...
Mr. Malcolmson, thank you. Have a great day.
Number seven, MI-2022-007-371-406-West Somerville.
For Letta Turner is the listed owner, third-party professional Melvin Johnson.
Letter of support from 42nd Democratic Board Executive Committee.
I'm excuse me, Mr. Chair.
Mr. Joe Consul has his hand raised.
Ken, please.
It is done.
Hey, board.
Joe Consul.
I was hired very last minute for this as board as attorney for the applicant as they're a company.
Are you going to are you ready to go right now, Joe?
I saw I reviewed all the emails and Hillary can confirm or disconfirm.
but it seems like they sent in everything.
Mr. Chair, this is Hillary.
I can confirm that all required documents
have been received in this matter.
All right.
Joe, you've already been sworn.
Just state your name for the record again.
That's Joseph Consul.
And can you identify your client
and relationship to the property?
Yeah, my client is Pedro Cordero.
He is the principal for Michael J. Construction, Inc.
Mr. Holloman has just a few questions.
Good afternoon.
Good afternoon, counsel.
Did you email all of the exhibits and documents that's required five days in advance to this hearing?
The team did, yes.
Thank you.
Please proceed and share your screen.
All right. My screen should be up on the refusal. As mentioned, I was literally just hired for this case. However, I believe that we can move forward.
This is 406 West Somerville Avenue. This application is for two units, each with two bedrooms and one bathroom. The property is zoned RSA3.
I think the most salient point here is that on this side of the block, just a quick cursory glance at the time I had, two unit approvals were granted for 404, which is the property to the left if you're facing the property, for 408, which is the property to the right if you're facing the property.
Also, 410, and then I saw 430 is two units, 434, 444, and 446 are all approved for two-unit living in existing family structures, all zoned RSA-3.
So we don't believe that this proposed two-family use is out of character with the neighborhood or specifically this block at all.
The folks, minus myself, presented in front of the new 42nd Ward and received a letter of support. The letter of support speaks of, you know, not really provisos, just some issues to discuss regarding trash and that sort of stuff, which is all contained in that letter.
Also included is the Certificate of Tax Clearance and the deed showing that the property was, and sorry, I said LLC, but it's Michael J. Construction Incorporated, received this property in June of 2023.
three um i have some pictures which are not the normal size or quality that i provide but this
is what i got uh the property is in disrepair uh and is overgrown and we believe would benefit from
this variance as it will be uh fully rehabilitated and improved some other shots
okay with that I'm going to call Pedro Cordero to adopt my testimony
can you raise your hand Mr. Cordero
Mr. Cordero could you state your name please and spell for the stenographer
Pedro Cordero
Pedro Cordero
will you spell your name
let me spell it for him because he can speak
very good English
my name is Juan Peña
give you his name
for him
Hillary what are we going to do with this
if Mr. Cordero
himself is unable to speak,
then we're just going to have to take Mr. Consul's
testimony. We were not
advised that an interpreter is needed.
Joe, you're an
officer of the court. We will
take your testimony.
Yes, I apologize for that.
Okay. No, no, no.
Questions from the board?
No, Mr. Chairman.
No, Chair.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
I do not see any further answer, Mr. Chair.
Planning Commissioner.
This is Paula Brumbelow-Burns.
The existing single...
Excuse me, hold on.
I'm not on the right line for a minute.
The comprehensive plan indicates this for single-family dwellings.
The existing...
Sorry, I am...
somebody came to me right at the time so let me do it again i'm ready the comprehensive plan
recommends no change to the residential single family zoning at this location this property has
no documented use as two dwelling units the applicant has not shown that they cannot derive
value from the currently approved single dwelling unit the applicant has shown however that requiring
parking on this lot would not be feasible or desirable the city planning commission recommends
that the board grant the variance from the parking requirements but deny the use for two dwelling
units. Thank you. And I apologize for that confusion. I was on the wrong block in the
spreadsheet. Mr. Kahn, so we're going to hold this. We're going to talk about this in executive
session. We'll have this for you next Wednesday at two o'clock. All right. Thank you very much,
board. Sure. Number eight, MI 2023-001-457-2830 South Alder Street. Michael McElhenney is
is the attorney letter of support
from the South Philadelphia Community Civic Association.
Applicant also provide 18 form letters in support
and non-opposition from neighbors,
16 from the 2800 block of South Alder Street.
Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman.
Could you state your name, please,
and spell for the court stenographer?
Michael McElhenney, M-C-I-L-H-I-N-N-E-Y.
Do you swear, affirm, and tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
Could you identify your client in relationship to the property?
My clients are Sabrina and Matt McEvoy, M-C-E-V-O-Y, the owners of the subject property.
And our Mr. Holloman has a few questions, sir.
Good afternoon, counsel.
Did you email all of the exhibits and documents as required five days in advance to this hearing?
Thank you.
Please proceed and share your screen.
Thank you.
So on, I've just shared my screen with my index of exhibits, the preliminarily, our zoning appeals at exhibit eight, the property was posted with photographs at exhibit nine.
Our neighbor notices for the RCO are at exhibit 10.