this morning.
Is this any better, Commissioner?
It's a little bit. Yep. Thank you.
You've already been sworn. Just state your name for the record.
Darlene 3, 4,
Pennsylvania, 1, excuse me,
Ballack-Kinwood, PA, 19104.
Right. Is the stenographer hearing her okay?
Right. Is the
stenographer hearing her okay?
Mr. Chairman, I believe I heard most of it, but I am dropping a word or two. I apologize.
Okay. Darlene, try to speak again.
This is Darlene 3, East City Avenue, number 496, Ballot-Kinwood, PA, 190.
That's better. That's better. Okay.
Could you identify your client in relationship to the property?
My client is Flores, Rental, and I have Mr. William Akaya on the line today.
Our vice chair has just a few questions.
Good morning, counsel.
Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Yes, I do.
Have you emailed in all the required documents and exhibits that are needed and required to proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing?
Yes, they were.
Thank you.
Please proceed and share your screen.
Thank you.
are you able to see my screen yeah but we're still struggling hearing your voice
I'll try and speak up and I'll try and get a better location next time
now good morning commissioners I'm representing the applicant at
12 north 16 street uh they two darlene i don't i don't think this is not darlene i don't think
the stenographer is hearing you yes mr chairman uh there are not hearing could you do me a favor
why don't we're going to go on to another case could you see if you can have this fixed
please. Okay. Thank you. Thank you.
Number nine, MI 2022, 003-753-825-South 13th Street. Joseph Consul is the attorney.
Letter support from Hawthorne Empowerment Coalition.
Joe Consul will be rejoining as a panelist, sir.
Good morning.
Good morning, Mr. Consul.
Could you state your name, please, and spell it for the court stenographer?
Yeah, it's Joseph, J-O-S-E-P-H, Consul, C-O-N-S-O-L-E.
Right.
Do you swear for him to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, sir.
Could you identify your client and the relationship to the property?
Yeah, the client is Mr. Pasquale DiGiulio, the owner of the property.
Okay, our vice chair has a few questions.
Good morning, counsel.
Do you agree to weigh the reading of the refusal and stipulate to his accuracy?
Have you emailed in all the required documents and exhibits that are needed and required to proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing?
Yes, sir.
Thank you.
Please proceed and share your screen.
my packet come up yes all right 825 south 13th street uh was purchased in 2003 by um
mr di julio um at that time it was a dilapidated three unit uh it's been fixed up over the years
and they did not seek the appropriate number of rental licenses until recently.
The refusal comes because while this is zoned RM1, the lot area is only 961 square feet,
whereas 1,080 square feet will be required for the three units.
So our hardship in my estimation is that it's a de minimis difference in the amount of square feet that are required for that third unit.
And as it's already set up as a three unit, we believe that the variance should be granted for that third unit.
we appeared in front of hawthorne and we got a full support of both the board and 27 meeting
attendees a very well attended meeting so we're hopeful that'll have some support this property
So we're hopeful that'll have some support.
This property is right across from the Hawthorne Pool on 13th Street.
All the properties there are two, three, three units, two units, four units.
And we believe ours fits in the character of that block.
Here's some photos and plans.
We've included some interiors as well.
Property has been fixed up nicely and is ready to be rented out.
And in addition to that, we've included our tax compliance and project information form, as well as the deed showing that was actually transferred in 2019 to him and his wife, but he had purchased it in 2003.
With that, I'll call my client to raise his hand and adopt my testimony.
They've been allowed to speak.
Hi, sir. Could you state your name, please, and spell for the court stenographer?
Yes. Good morning, everyone. My name is Pasquale DiGiulio, P-A-S-Q-U-A-L-E.
Last name, D as in David, I, G as in George, I, U, L, I, O.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Proceed, counsel.
Good morning, Mr. DiGiulio.
Did you hear my testimony just now regarding your property on 13th Street?
Yes, I did, sir.
Was it true and accurate, and do you adopt it as your own?
Yes, sir.
All right.
I have nothing further.
Questions from the board?
Do you have any questions or comments from the virtual audience?
I see no further answer, Mr. Chair.
Planning Commission.
Thank you, Chair, and good morning. David Fecto with the City Planning Commission.
The comprehensive plan recommends no change to the residential multifamily zoning at this location.
The proposed variance is minimal and does not conflict with the purpose and spirit of the zoning code.
The City Planning Commission recommends that the Board grant the proposed dimensional variance.
Thank you. MI 2022-003-753-825 South 13th Street, I vote yes.
James Snell, my vote is yes.
My vote is yes.
Thank you, Board.
Thomas?
Oh, sorry.
Mr. Consul, you have your three votes.
Thank you.
Number 10, MI 2023-001-040-1204 East Chelten Avenue.
Roger Perry is the attorney for the owner.
There was a letter of opposition from the 12th Ward Democratic Committee, RCO.
Mr. Perry will be rejoining as a panelist.
Right.
good morning mr perry morning could you state your name please and spell for the court stenographer
yes my name is roger perry r-o-g-e-r-p-e-r-r-y and i represent the owner of the property
sandrina williams all right do you swear a firm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing
but the truth i do our vice chair has just a few questions good morning council do you agree to
waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate towards adequacy i do have the email and all
the required documents and exhibits that are needed to proceed with this case five days
advance of this hearing yes i have thank you please proceed and share your screen
okay i have several screens to share um this is uh the photographs are probably
the easiest thing well let me go all the way back to the beginning
this is the deed i represent sandrina william she uh purchased this property as an individual
mr perry nothing there's nothing up there's nothing up uh
You're coming up now.
Oh, great.
Thank you very much.
Here you are.
Start at the beginning.
Sandrina Williams purchased this property a year ago.
a year ago. She lives in the first floor of an over-under duplex. She understood when she
She lives in the first floor of an over-under.
purchased it that it was a duplex, and indeed the records of the city go back to 1997 when the
property was operated as a duplex. And purchasing it last year, she felt it was a duplex, and it
was indeed renovated and metered and so forth as such. When she went to get her current rental
license. They indicated that the use had expired for, you know, non-licensing over the years and
so forth. So we had two meetings with the RCOs. There were three RCOs involved. They weren't
particularly concerned about the duplex use. This is the second unit and this is the first unit and
so forth, adjacent properties or residential properties as well. Their concern was that
there were some issues at the back of the house. So this was the second meeting. We both noticed
and flyered for both meetings and so forth. These are the adjacent properties.
Property historically was adjacent to a commercial use. This is the property at 1202,
which you can see as a corner was used as a traditional commercial property but as you move
further up 1204 1206 and so forth you had traditional residential uses and so forth
this is miss williams apartment on the first floor you can see it's all occupied and so forth
separate bathroom and kitchens this is the rear yard area in the rear yard area this is a letter
of opposition, if we read the letter of opposition, they indicated that they were concerned that this
rear had wires that were low hanging and a compressor on the rear deck for fire egress
primarily. They asked us to request a fire safety certification and that was attempted through the
fire administration and then they said they don't do fire safety certifications and all the people
that were contacted just do sprinklers and so forth nobody was willing to come in and said this
is this is safe in the event of fire although the second apartment is very nice this is the
upstairs apartment this is the over duplex has windows to access both the front and the back
decks and so forth nice layout they have separate entrances although the the RCO noted that there's
a primary entrance on the front deck. Once you get in the primary porch entrance, they have
separate entrances, one going upstairs and one to the lower apartment unit. This is her affidavit
saying that she, and that's a tax clearance certificate. Let me go back and show you the
separate entrances if I can. That was noted as rear deck, rear.
That's probably it.
I don't know.
It's probably a bad photo.
Let me see what else I have on my notes.
Oh, it has a main, one main entrance, but what you get inside, it separates.
There's a door to the lower unit, and then there's stairs up with a separate door to the second upstairs unit, which is this one.
As you can see in the photos, the adjacent properties on both sides and going up the lot, going up the street, which is here, are substantially similar residential properties.
And because she indicated that she thought it was a duplex, she didn't confirm that with the city, took these photographs from the initial posting, and then we took a second set in July.
But it is listed as CMX2, but that was generated historically back in the 90s by the use of these properties here.
But as the board can see, the properties from 1206 going up in numbers are all traditional residential properties.
So I would say that we tried to comply with the RCO's request.
There were no opposition, neighbors and so forth.
Only the RCO appeared and asked if we could get a safety certification as to access to the roofs and so forth.
And we were unable to do that.
So we think that, you know, because of the history of the property and the fact that it would not be used as a commercial property, and that would be a hardship to tear down the duplex and or the first floor for commercial use, we feel that a variance would be appropriate for this traditional use.
Mr. Perry, what's the earliest date that this was a duplex?
1997 is what I have.
Do you want to bring your client on, please?
Yeah, sure.
Are you here, Sandrina?
They've been allowed to speak.
Hi, could you state your name, please, and spell for the court stenographer?
Hi, could you state your name, please, and spell for the court stenographer?
You're going to have to speak up. We can't hear you, ma'am.
Are you hearing me any better now?
Yeah, we hear you better now.
Okay, good morning, everyone. My name is Sandrina Williams.
Name spelled S-A-N-D-R-I-N-A, last name Williams, W-I-L-L-I-A-M-S.
You swear for him to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
I do. Proceed, counsel. Thank you. Ms. Williams, it's Roger Perry. Did you hear my testimony and statements in terms of the use of the property and the work that was done with the RCOs?
I did. And can you adopt that testimony to the best of your knowledge is true and correct?
Yes. Thank you very much.
Thank you. Questions from the board? No, Mr. Chair.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
i do not see any hands mr chair planning commission thank you mr chairman and good
morning david vecto with the city planning commission the comprehensive plan recommends
a change in zoning in this location from commercial mixed use to residential single
family the appellant has shown that the configuration of the property presents a
clear hardship requiring relief from the commercial ground floor provision of the zoning code the city
Planning Commission recommends the board grant the proposed variants. Thank you. MI 2023-001-040-1204
East Chilton Avenue, I vote yes. Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes. James Snell, my vote is yes.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes. Thank you, counsel. Thank you very much, chairman. Sure. Number 12,
MI-2022-005-273-744 Lombard Street.
Michael Mattione is the attorney.