There's a letter of non-opposition from Washington Square West Civic Association with provisos
and also a letter of non-opposition from Council Member Squill.
And as a...
Good morning, Mr. Mattione. Could the record, could you please state your name and spell for
the court stenographer? Certainly. Good morning, Mr. Chairman, Michael Mattione, M-A-T-T-I-O-N-I.
Right. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes. Could you identify your client and relationship to the property?
Sure. It's James and Amy Shin and Shin Properties LLC, the owner of 744 Lombard Street.
All right, and 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?
Good morning, yes.
Have you emailed in all the required documents and exhibits that are needed to proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing?
Yes, sir.
Thank you.
Please proceed and share your screen.
Thank you.
Mr. Mattione, this is Hillary.
I just had a quick question.
The deed listed two LLCs beyond properties and SHIN properties.
Is the principle the same for both of those LLCs?
Yes, it is.
Thank you very much.
Thank you.
Again, good morning, Mr. Chairman, members of the board.
And like we said, we did present exhibits in advance, including the tax clearance refusal.
A non-opposition letter from Council Member Squilla.
And again, the refusal is just because we're proposing a business in the first floor of this three-unit property in an RM1 zoning district.
And we have a letter of non-opposition from Council Member Squilla with two provisos, the same two provisos that Washington West also asked for.
here's the letter of non-opposition from Washington West. And again, they asked that
we have two provisos not to have body art and that no fortune telling in the
business. As you can see, there are the provisos. And on their summary letter,
as you can see, there were 13 people that voted. 13 people voted to not oppose.
nobody voted to oppose. So it was a unanimous non-opposition.
That's an old floor plan. Coming down, the photos, this property is at 8th and Lombard
on the southeast corner. As you can see, it is two residential units above and a first floor storefront.
Two residential units above and a first floor storefront.
And just some additional photographs to get the full view of the building.
And it's got the traditional windows that a storefront would have.
And this, from what we can tell, has always been used as a storefront.
When you go back to 1965, there was a permit for a vacant store on the first floor with multifamily units above.
1966, again, another use registration permit with a vacant store on the first floor and apartments above.
And again, they would like to have a barbershop in this facility.
I just want to show some interior photos, again, from the rear. That entrance is solely for the residential units above. There is no connection between the store on the first floor and in the basement and the residential units above. They're totally and completely separate.
it. And as you can see inside, this is a clear space. There is a restroom. There is no kitchen
facilities. There is no shower or bathtub in the restroom. This is and has always been a
commercially used property and looking the other way towards Lombard Street. And again, a couple of
a photograph showing, let me get into the next photograph, showing the basement, just a,
just a clear span basement. The business itself, again, it's across the street from another
business. Cidrone's Flowers is right across the street on the other side of 8th Street.
There are residences on the other corners, but they're clearly residentially used properties
built as residences. This property is a much older property and was clearly built for commercial
purposes on the first floor. They seek to operate a barbershop here, five chairs for customers to
sit in seven days a week, 9 a.m. to 9 p.m. They estimate 10 full and part-time employees. Any
trash that they have will be stored in the basement and will be have private trash pickup.
When you look at this building, the physical constraints of it are clear. It's not a residence.
The residences are separate. They're above the storefront. There is no way to get from the
storefront to the residences. So you couldn't add this to the existing residences. The windows and
the physical configuration make it clear that this is meant to be used for a commercial purpose.
and we have some old permits that show prior commercial uses.
We believe that between the physical constraints of the building and the past uses that this
meets the requirements to show a physical hardship to the land that requires or where
the variance requested should be granted.
And the use is, again, a relatively low impact commercial use, a barbershop.
It's not some bar that would have a ton of impact on the community, negative impact.
So, and, you know, the other requirements for a variance, we believe, are met as well.
What I would like to do, Mr. Chairman, is call on my client, James Shin.
Good morning, Mr. Shin. Could you state your name, please, and spell for the court stenographer?
Hi, my name is James Shin, J-A-M-E-S-S-H-I-N.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
yes I do proceed counsel
thank you Mr. Chair James
did you hear my statements
yes and are they true
and correct yes
they're correct and do you adopt
them as your testimony
yes I have no
further questions for
questions from the board
no Mr. Chairman
no chair
questions or comments from the
virtual audience
I do not see any further hands, Mr. Chair.
Planning Commission.
Thank you, sir, and good morning.
David Fecto with the City Planning Commission.
Mr. Chairman and board members, the comprehensive plan recommends no change to the residential multifamily zoning at this location.
This property has a documented history of commercial use dating to at least the middle 1960s.
The City Planning Commission recommends that the board grant the use variants for personal service.
Thank you.
MI 2022, 005-273-744 Lombard Street.
I vote yes with proviso.
No body, art, service, or fortune-telling service.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes with proviso.
James Snell, my vote is yes with Proviso.
James Snell, my vote is yes with proviso.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes with Proviso.
Thank you, counsel.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
All right, number 13, MI 2022-005-284-109, Renard Torres.
Vern Anastasio is the attorney.
Letter of opposition from the Somerton Civic Association.
I'm coming back in as a panelist, sir.
Good morning, counsel. Could you state your name, please, and spell for the court stenographer?
Good morning, Mr. Chair. Vern Anastasio, A-N-A-S-T-A-S-I-O, 2016 Spruce Street, Philadelphia.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Could you identify your client in a relationship to this property?
yeah i represent stephanie lee lynn who is the uh agent uh for the owner of the property and our
vice chair has just a few questions thank you good morning council do you agree to wave the
reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy i do have you emailed in all the
required documents and exhibits that are needed to proceed with this case five days in advance
of this hearing i have thank you please proceed to share your screen thank you sir mr chair just
Just for one brief note, Attorney Emerson can confirm this.
We are unable to secure a tax clearance.
My understanding that we'll be putting the case on and then pending that, you'll make a decision.
That's right.
Yeah, she mentioned that to us this morning.
Good enough.
Thanks for your patience and getting oriented. Okay. 109 Renner Terrace. It's for the legalization
of what they do is they put two sheds on the property. It's a large lot, but the containers,
basically they're container storage sort of storage containers. They're more than 130 square
feet. And that's why we're here. There are two of them that kicked in the refusal, although
there are three sheds total. And one of them is 640 square feet, one of them is 320 square
feet. And as a result, they'd like to get them legalized, which is why we are seeking
the zoning relief. Here are the plans that show it.
There's the existing main house and then behind in the yard, we have two, two structures that
are in question 1640, which is more than is permitted.
it, and the other one is 407.
Photos of the property and the storage units are behind their fence.
the larger of the two you can see from the sidewalk
and it's just personal storage equipment I know there was a question of whether or not there was
some sort of business activity but that's not the case and my client will affirm that as well
we did meet with the community organization on 13th June in person
and 53 individual households were mailed when my clients moved into this property they did have an
extraordinary amount of of uh items and materials that needed to be stored thus the two uh the two
container storage containers being placed on the lot they did not know that that that uh the sizes
would exceed what was allowed by code, and therefore they're requesting the relief so
that they can maintain them. In the alternative, if they were to be allowed to have a temporary
variance to keep the smaller of the two for at least 12 to 24 months, they would be able to
slowly empty and get the materials out but as an alternative i understand that the community would
like them both removed and i believe my client would be amenable to that if the board did not
And I believe my client would be amenable to that if the board did not want to grant the variance for both, but only ask that the larger of the two be removed immediately.
I want to grant them.
And then the second, the smaller, much smaller, 320 square feet, be allowed until, you know, temporarily.
With that, I'm going to ask my client, Stephanie Lynn, to raise her virtual hand.
they found out to speak could you state your name please and spell for the courts of honor
yes stephanie lynn that's s-t-e-p-h-a-n-i-e lynn l-i-n right do you swear affirm to tell the
truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth yes i do proceed counsel thank you mr chair
Stephanie, did you hear my presentation to the board this morning?
Was that a yes?
Yes, I did.
And is it true and accurate to the best of your knowledge?
Yes, it is.
And do you adopt it as your own testimony?
Yes, I do.
Do you have anything to add?
No, I do not.
Thank you.
Mr. Chair, I'm going to rest my case.
All right.
Questions from the board?
No, Mr. Chairman.
No, Chair.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
Mr. Chair, I have Alice Udovich with their hand raised. I have allowed them to speak.
Good morning, Alice. Could you state your name, please, and spell for the court stenographer?
Good morning, Chairman, members of the board. Alice Udovich, U-D-O-V-I-C-H, on behalf of Councilman Brian O'Neill.
Right. Do you swear for him to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Proceed.
Chairman, I think you'll agree this is quite excessive, especially in a purely residential neighborhood. The neighbors are quite upset about the current conditions. The councilman opposes the granting of the variance for these storage containers on that property.
Thank you. Is there anyone else in the virtual audience?
No further hands, Mr. Chair.
planning commission thank you chairman and good morning david effecto with the city planning
commission the comprehensive plan recommends no change to the residential single family zoning at
this location the appellant seeks to legalize two large sheds that were built without the benefit of
permits the appellant has not shown that they cannot derive value from the property without
the two sheds and there is no unique physical condition or circumstance of this property
that would prevent it from being used in conformance with the zoning code the city planning
Commission recommends the board deny the proposed variances for accessory uses and structures.
As we stated earlier, we're waiting on a tax clearance. We will hold this until we receive
the tax clearance. Mr. Chair, if I could just put one final counter to the Planning Commission's
comment on the record, just to preserve the record. Thank you. Just a note, the larger of
the two, outside of the larger of the two, the very top of it being able to be seen from the
road, neither of these sheds adversely impact anyone's light or air or access to their particular
property. It's simply an aesthetic thing as it relates to the larger of the two. So their
existence and their continued existence for as long as it had been did not disrupt anyone
any of the immediate neighbors and or their quality of life. So just for the record. Thank
you. All right. Thank you for that. And once the taxes are cleared up, we'll bring that back. Thank
you. Appreciate it. This is Hillary. I just want to note that the record is otherwise closed except
for the tax information. Thank you. Thank you. Number four, MI 2023-001-039-2712 North 16th