Thank you.
Thank you.
Mr. Chairman, can you hear me?
We can.
Thank you.
And Chair, you can begin as you wish.
How many people are in?
Thank you.
Good morning, everyone.
My name is Bill Bergman, and I will be chairing this morning's EBA hearings.
With me is our Vice Chair, Ismael Shahid.
Present, Mr. Chairman.
Our Board Member, Thomas Holliman.
Present, Mr. Chairman.
And our Board Member, James Snell.
Present, Mr. Chairman.
Also present is Ryan McSherry, our Attorney for the Day, and our Executive Director, Tanya Sunkit.
Here's our virtual format.
Be advised, the proceedings are being recorded.
The video will be available by contacting tonyasunkett at phillip.gov.
For the benefit of our court stenographer, we ask attorneys and witnesses to identify themselves before testifying.
If you're participating by phone and you wish to testify, press star 9 to raise your hand and star 6 to unmute.
When 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 not for comments or testimony. All comments should be directed to our executive
director, Tanya Sunken. Let's look at today's schedule and any possible continuances.
Number 12, MI 2023-001-269-709 West Butler Avenue, this case is continued. Are there any comments
relative to that case? Are there other requests for continuance? Please raise your hand.
Good morning, Chair. This is Fatina L. I'll be your co-host for today.
Thank you.
You're welcome. I see no hands.
Okay. I also have a few cases here that we do not have documents.
Number four, MI 2023-001-304-16 West Johnson Avenue. This is the first listing.
Vernon Lucas is the owner. Andrew Barrios was working with him. No exhibits, first listing.
I see no hands, Chair.
Thank you. Number four, MI 2023-001-304-16 Winston Street. This case is continued. Mark must be tried.
Case number 10, MI 2023-001-268-1343 East Lycoming Street.
Anna, Narda, Sierra are the listed owners. No exhibits. First listing.
I see no handshare. MI 2023-001-268-1343 East Lycoming Street. That case is continued. Mark
must be tried. Number 11, MI 2023-001-264-314-Winona Street. Andy and Sarah Kim are the
listed owners. No exhibits, first listing. Chair, we have Andy Kim. Okay.
It looks like Sarah Kim as well. I love them to speak.
good morning mr kim good morning would you state your name please and spell for the court stenographer
Would you state your name, please, and spell it for the court stenographer?
andy kim
Andy Kim, A-N-D-Y-K-I-M.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
We do not have any documents that were sent in for your case, sir.
To my knowledge, there was a packet that was sent in.
um i had the assistance of uh um john um i'm sorry the hold on a second the
company name but it was a whole packet it has um 34 pages of documents yes sir we don't have
we don't have any of your documents what we're going to have to do is continue the case oh
Hello, Mr. Kim?
We're going to continue the case, and please call the office, and the office will make sure that all your documents are in order, okay?
Yes, sir.
Okay, thank you.
So, number 11, MI 2023, 001-264-314 Winona Street, this case is continued.
Hi, Chair. This is Tanya. May I speak? Mr. Kim, if you could, Mr. Kim, contact our office
right away. We'll put you right back on the list within the next 30 days. Sorry for the
inconvenience if you sent them and we didn't get them. Thank you so much, Chair.
Thank you. Mr. Kim, did you hear that?
Okay. We're going to go to our add-on list.
MI 2023-001-088-2848 Chatham Street.
The vote on this is myself, Ishmael, and Thomas Holloman.
I vote yes for a temporary variance to expire 1-31-26.
Hours of operation, Sunday to 30, events end by 8 p.m.
Friday, Saturday, events end by 11 p.m.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes with proviso.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes with proviso.
Thank you.
We're going to go to number 13, which will be our first case.
MI 2022 004357 1439 Bonshaw Street.
Diana and Steven Wu are the owners.
It's a pro se.
This application is for a two-family household living in an existing structure.
The proposed use of two-family living, household living, is prohibited in the RSA 5.
There's a letter of opposition from Community on the Rise, and there's also a letter of opposition from Council Member Phillips.
Diana Wu has been promoted to panelist.
Good morning. Could you please state your name and spell it for the court stenographer?
Good morning. My name is Diana Wu, D-I-A-N-A-W-U.
Do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Our vice chair has just a few questions for you.
Good morning. Have you emailed them all the exhibits and documents that are needed to proceed with this case by the end of this hearing?
Thank you.
Please proceed and share your screen.
Let me see.
You're up.
I'm just going to full screen this.
Oh, you.
can you guys see it we can okay
so this is the refusal letter for the appeal
um this is the application for the appeal
and uh we're requesting um a rental license from a one unit to a two unit
And in the past, I see that the previous owner had it as a rental license of the two units.
And this is the project information form.
project information form, and this is the deed, and the tax clearance form, and this
is the letter from the RCO opposing our appeal, this is the poster outside the house,
And these are the pictures of the exterior and interior.
So when we got the house, it's already a two-unit property. So there are two separate doors going
into two different units. So this is the first floor and then this is going up to the second
unit. These are the interior of the first floor, first unit. It has a separate kitchen and separate
bathroom. And also, when we got the house, it already has two separate electric and two
separate gas meters. This is a separate, the first floor bathroom, the hallway, a bedroom,
bedroom. And then this leads to the second unit, which is upstairs. This is the living room.
bedroom, and then a separate bath, and a separate kitchen.
And then here it shows like it had two electric meters, and we also updated to
an ENCODE electric meter when we got the house. And these are the two gas meters that were in the
basement and um i asked for the neighbors um if it was okay to change it to a two unit and
ask for their names and petition and that's it
when you when did you purchase the property um december 2021
2021. And was it advertised as a duplex? It was advertised as a two-family, but it needs to go
through application to have it as a two-unit. Okay. All right. All right. Thank you. Questions
from the board? No, Chair. No, Mr. Chairman. No, Chair. Questions or comments from the virtual
audience. I see no hands, Chair. Planning Commission. Good morning, Chair Bergman. This
is Ian Haggerty with the Philadelphia City Planning Commission. Last name spelled H-E-G-A-R-T-Y.
You swear for him to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Yes, sir. Glad to see you, Mr. Haggerty. Good to see you as well, Chair. Good morning,
Board members, the proposed zoning in the comprehensive plan proposes no change from
the existing RSA 5 single-family zoning at this location. However, the proposed use is consistent
with the physical configuration of the building, and requiring single-family use at this site would
be a clear hardship for the owner. The City Planning Commission recommends that the Board
grant the variance. Thank you. MI 2022-004-357-1439 Fanshawe Street, I vote yes.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes. James Snell, my vote is yes.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes. Thank you. You have your votes. Thank you.
okay so we're going to go now to number five
we have a series of five cases um that are related but will be heard separately
so number five mi 2022 006 090 818 north 40 street darwin beauvais is the attorney
Leonard Reuter will be appearing for the city. There's a letter of support from Belmont Alliance Civic Association. The project is strongly supported by Councilmember Gauthier. There's a received waiver letter from the Department of Planning and Development as well as authorization letter from the Redevelopment Authority.
Good morning, Mr. Chairman.
How are you, sir? Could you please state your name and spell for the court's sonographer?
How are you, sir?
Could you please state your name and spell for the court stenographer?
Yes, first.
Yes. First name Darwin, last name Beauvais. That's B-E-A-U-V as in victory, A-I-S as in Sam, from the law firm of Omeya.
You swear a firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
So help me God.
Thank you. Leonard?
I am just curious if nothing else for my own edification, is Leonard here to represent
phdc in support uh i i believe so um um brian
so we i mean i i i think we're okay to proceed even without leonard we did receive the waiver
letters um good great yeah that's right okay darwin proceed okay just trying to hold on one minute um
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 documents and exhibits that are needed and required to proceed with this case?
Yes, I have.
Thank you, counsel.
Please proceed and share your screen.
Thank you.
Mr. Chairman, good morning. Thank you for having me. Again, my name is Darwin Beauvais. I'm from the law firm of Obermeyer, located at 1500 Market Street.
Today, I bring to you a great project with several applications that are connected together for an affordable housing project that's supported by PHDC, as well as the Pennsylvania Finance Agency, PHFA.
It is a low-income tax credit project. Here in particular, our exhibits for this particular address range from exhibits 1 through 16, where we have our referral, we have site plans, we have a memorandum of law, we have our zoning notice letter, we have our photograph and our authorization letter.
um also in the chat and if they could be identified because I'll most likely turn to them
we have Mr. Michael Thorpe who is the executive director of the Mount Vernon CDC which is the
owner and principal of of the official owner North 40th Street LP um and if we can also identify
the architect, Ian Toner, who I will be asking questions shortly.
So as I mentioned, this is a, let's just go to the referral.
as you can see we have a referral our application is for three dwelling units as well as having
an assembly slash entertainment area on the ground floor.
In other words, a multi-use facility
that could be used for community events.
If Mr. Ian Toner could be promoted
because I would like to walk the board
through our floor plans.
As you see here.
please. While that's happening, you could see the site plan. We're on the corner of 40th Street here
and Reno Street here. And here is our elevation. We're a slight rendering. We comply with every
with all the dimensions. And this particular application is a referral only because we're
not providing any ground floor activity as required and described in CME. But nonetheless,
And here are elevations.
our floor plans now Mr. Toner
is he on if you can just
Mr. Toner
Darwin why don't you walk us through
Okay. So what you're looking at here is the first floor with the entrance, and there is a management office, as well as two restrooms, as well as a kitchen area, and then the open space.
Like we mentioned before, Mount Vernon CDC is a community development corporation.
They've been in the Mantua section of Philadelphia, of West Philadelphia, for several years.
And they feel that they, one, have a pulse with the community, but two, also believe that this amenity will greatly serve the community.
Our next floor.
Lauren, I'm here.
I don't know if anyone can hear me.
Oh, we can hear you now.
We can hear you now.
Great.
The first floor.
So why don't you walk us through floors, the next floor?
Mr. Toner, state your name, please, and spell for the court stenographer.
Ian Toner, I-A-N-T-O-N-E-R from Toner Architects.
Do you swear for him to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Proceed, please.
Okay. Well, so Darwin, you did a great job on the first floor. Second floor, we have a one-bedroom, one-bathroom unit in the front. That's the green unit there. And then in the rear, we have the lower half of a two-bedroom, one-bath unit where you see the bathroom in the kitchen there and the living space.
And then when we get up to the third floor, you'll see in the rear there, the yellow, that's the bedroom portion of that unit that began on the lower level.
And then you'll see in the front, we have a two bedroom, one bathroom apartment as well.
So it's a total of three units.
Yeah. Thank you, Mr. Tony.
Thank you.
So, and again, you know, our zoning is CMX2, and we want to give the board a good sense of where we are.
Here are our photographs.
The lot is vacant, as you can see.
This is looking across from the lot.
It's our posting, our posting from a different angle, and again, a corner, a corner lot.
All in all, what we believe we have is an affordable housing product that will require an influx of activity, but we are taking the position that it can't sustain commercial activity at a level that will encourage or entice businesses to come in.
So therefore, Mount Vernon CDC has taken it upon, not upon itself, but has taken it upon itself to interact with the community, see what exactly could work in partnership with the community, and creating this community space makes sense.
Again, this is supported by the PHDC, RDA, the land bank, the like, and we did receive funding from the, from PHFA.
At this time, I would like to note that the board should feel comfortable in granting our referral because if you look at what we've presented, our structure does not congest the sidewalks, does not congest the rest of the neighborhood because it's an empty lot.
Because we're building a residential that has this non-residential, I don't want to say commercial, but this non-residential use, we are not taxing.
but this non-residential use, we submit that we're not taxing any utilities. Therefore,
we're not burdening any light and air as well. And I think we satisfy all the qualifications
for a referral to be accepted, for a special exception in particular to be granted in this
case. Now, with that said, I would like to call up Mr. Thorpe.
Michael Thorpe, you've been unmuted.
I am here.
Sir, could you state your name and spell, please, for the court stenographer?
Yes, my name is Michael, M-I-C-H-A-E-L, Thorpe, T-H-O-R-P-E. I am the executive director of the
Mount Vernon Manor CDC. Okay. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth and
nothing but the truth? Yes, I do. Proceed, Darwin. All right. First and foremost, Mr. Thorpe,
I apologize for misspeaking the name of the organization. It's the Mount Vernon Manor
CDC. Is that correct? Yeah, that is correct. Okay. And you heard everything that myself and
mr toner stated uh and would you adopt that as your own testimony yes i would all right well
just for a point of information your next two cases the same people you'll use
yes okay thank you so uh questions from the board no mr chairman no chair
questions or comments from the virtual audience
here we have andrew goodman good morning mr goodman could you state your name please and
spell for the court stenographer good morning andrew goodman a-n-d-r-e-w-g-o-o-d-m-a-n
here representing the office of third district council member jamie gaudier spelled g-a-u-t-h-i-e-r
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Proceed, sir.
Thank you.
Mr. Chair, members of the board, just here to affirm Councilmember Gaudier's strong support and ask that the board grant the special exception.
We do believe that the community room use is kind of a minimal application of the use and would certainly not have any kind of undue burdens on the surrounding context and community.
Therefore, we think it meets the thresholds for the granting of the special exception.
Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Goodman.
Anyone else in the virtual audience?
I see no hands, Chair.
Planning Commission.
Morning, Chair Bergman.
Ian Eggerty for the Philadelphia City Planning Commission.
Board members, this is an application for a special exception for assembly and entertainment used in a CMX2 district.
In April 2023, the zoning map was actually amended in this area.
However, the application was filed while the zoning was still CMX2.
The proposed use will not cause detrimental impacts to the neighborhood beyond what normally might be expected for the use.
And therefore, the City Planning Commission recommends that the board grant the special exception.
Thank you. MI 2022-006-090-818-North 40th Street, I vote yes.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes.
James Snell, my vote is yes.
Darwin, we're going to move to number seven, MI-2023-006-089-847-North 40th Street.
Letter of support from the Mantua Civic Association.
Project strongly supported by Councilmember Gauthier received waiver letter from planning and development, as well as an authorization letter from the Department of Public Property.
um darwin just state your name for the record you've already been sworn yes again good morning
mr chairman members of the board my name is darwin beauvais um just just to orient the board this is
847 north 40th street this is a refusal again we i represent the mount vernon manor cdc which is
the principal in the legal ownership of North 40th LP. Our intention here is to provide
affordable housing. And again, this project is supported by PHFA in the form of low-income tax
credits, as well as PhDC, as you'll see with the authorization letter. Again, let me just
Orient the board with, this is a vacant property, and it sits on along other lots that are also vacant, which are also part of future requests by the applicant.
orient the board with, this is a vacant.
in um what let's just start here we are looking to build three a multi-family unit for four dwellings
here and our refusal is ranges is regarding the setback now i would like to turn at this time to
the to our architect again here's our rendering this is where we are located and maybe we'll
start hearing in you can maybe explain uh what we're looking at in relation to the setback
refusal and just state your name you've already been sworn yes ian toner toner architects
proceed counsel yes mr mr tona do you see the screen i do okay can you explain where it's marked
847 um where that drawing in relation to the the 20 or the six six uh the the in order i i'm sorry
I have my variances mixed up here because I thought we were going in order.
I'm looking at 830.
We are looking at 847.
Yes, we are proposing a 6.3-foot setback and where there's a 22-foot setback required.
But here, what we're looking at, I would like for you to explain.
Sure. So our our surveyor went out and took a look at the neighboring existing neighboring buildings, of which there are not a lot, but there there are some.
Our setback matches a building at 863, which is not too far away.
Okay. And so we're proposing to match that. And we are also, I mean, we have a building that we're, as you can see in the rendering, that we're proposing next door that will match that setback as well.
Okay. So it's all other dimensions have been satisfied. So let's just walk us through
the floor plans. Okay. Can everybody see the entire plan?
It's slightly cut off to the right on my screen.
we're talking four units right yes okay mr tona just just walk us through real quick let's
do this in three minutes yeah so the blue unit on the right is um two bedrooms one bathroom and
And that actually extends up all three stories of the building in the rear of this floor.
We have a one bedroom, sorry, two bedroom, one bathroom unit.
That's the green.
And in here on the second floor and the blue, you see the upper, you know, the middle part of that first unit with the bedroom and the bathroom.
And then in the rear again, two bedroom, one bathroom unit.
in yellow great in here on third floor the dark blue is the second bedroom of that front unit
and then the light blue is the same same layout as below the two bedroom one bathroom unit great
all right thank you again mr chairman members of the board here are the photographs of what we're
looking at this is across the street if any of these photos look familiar it's because we are
in the same neighborhood or the posting and and again we're taking the position that that we are
providing affordable housing, our setback wasn't done because
our setback wasn't done because of some unnecessary desire.
We were trying to match the adjacent buildings.
And because of that, again,
it's the position of Mount Vernon Manor CDC
to always be in partnership with the fabric of the community.
At this time, I would like to call Mr. Thorpe to the-
Hi, sir. Just state your name. You've already been sworn.
Michael Thorpe.
Mr. Thorpe, did you hear everything that was stated by myself and Mr. Toner?
I did.
Would you adopt that as your own testimony?
Absolutely.
All right.
Thank you. Questions from the board?
No, chair.
No, chair.
All right. Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
Chair, we have Andrew Goodman.
Hi, Mr. Goodman. You've already been sworn to just state your name for the record.
Yes, Andrew Goodman, representing Third District Councilmember Jamie Gaudier.
Proceed, sir. Thank you. Just here again to affirm Councilmember Gaudier's strong support
and ask that the Board grant the variance this morning. Thank you. Thank you. Is there anyone
else thank you is there anyone else in the virtual audience i see no chair excuse me commission
thank you chair bergman ian hegarty for the philadelphia city planning commission
board members in 2017 the zoning map was was amended in this area this parcel was intentionally
left as rm1 multifamily the proposed dimensional variance is necessary we agree because strict
interpretation of the setback rules would render residential development of this parcel unviable.
The City Planning Commission recommends that the board grant the variance.
Thank you. MI 2022-006089-847 North 40th Street, I vote yes.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes. James Snell, my vote is yes.
Thank you. We're moving to number nine, MI 2022-005-626-830 North 40th Street.
Mr. Beauvais, again, just state your name, sir, for the record.
Yes. Again, good morning, Mr. Chairman, members of the board. My name is Darwin Beauvais,
and I am pleased to represent Mount Vernon Manor CDC in their application.
for 830 North 40th Street. Just to a technical note, the CDC is the principal of the legal owner,
which is North 40th Street LP. We do have a set of exhibits marked from 1 through 16,
and I'll just start with the refusal, so it could be helpful to orient the board.
This refusal, if I can get it all into the screen, this refusal, excuse me, this refusal
situates around having active use because of the location of the building. It sits in a split
zoning districts, CMX2, RSA3. Neither one of those designation will qualify our application
because we're seeking three units multifamily dwelling. If I can give you a photo just to
orient the board. Again, this is a vacant lot. It's a corner lot. And
Here is our rendering, what we're proposing on doing.
Now, if we can identify Ian Toner, and he can walk us through the floor plans.
Mr. Toner, just state your name, please, for the record.
Ian Toner, can you hear me?
Yes, we can. Proceed.
Okay, great. Ian Toner from Toner Architects.
Yes, Mr. Tona, can you walk us through the first floor?
Sure. First floor is a three bedroom, one and a half bath unit. And again, we're right at the corner, so we get nice windows all down that long side there you can see in the bedrooms.
Second floor.
On the second floor, we have in the rear the lower part of a two-bedroom, one-bathroom unit, and in the front, we have the lower portion of a two-bedroom unit as well.
And then on the upper floor, we have the bedrooms and the bathrooms for those two units below.
Okay. All right. Thank you. Again, for the interest of time, I would like the board to know that this is supported by PHFA in the form of low-income tax credits.
It's also supported by PHTC in terms of helping us promote affordable housing in this area.
This area has been in need for affordable housing, for any kind of housing, let alone affordable housing.
And what we're asking that the board is that even though we don't have any commercial activity, that the need for housing can be more of a priority for the board to understand in order to grant us this application.
Why don't you call your client back?
Yes. Mr. Thorpe, do you have a moment?
Mr. Thorpe, just state your name for the record, please.
Michael Thorpe.
Thank you. Proceed, counsel.
Mr. Thorpe, did you hear everything that myself and Mr.
Toner said? Yes, I did. I heard everything.
Would you adopt that as your own testimony?
Absolutely. Thank you. Questions from the board?
No, Chair. No, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you. Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
Yes, Chair. We have Andrew Goodman.
Mr. Goodman, just state your name for the record, please. And thank you for staying on the phone this long.
Absolutely. Andrew Goodman from Councilmember Jamie Gaudier's office.
Proceed, Council.
Again, affirming Councilmember Gaudier's strong support for this variance.
We do believe the proposed use is more in line with the RM1 remapping that we facilitated for this block as part of a neighborhood remapping process earlier this year, but was after this application had been initiated.
So we ask that the board grant the variance.
Thank you. Is there anyone else in the virtual audience?
I see no hands, Chair.
Planning Commission.
Thank you, Chair Bergman. Ian Hegarty for the Philadelphia City Planning Commission.
board members in april 2023 the zoning map was amended in this area from cmx2 to rm1
the proposed use is permitted as a matter of right under the new zoning district and so the
city planning commission recommends that the board grant the variance thank you mi2022-005-626-830
north 40 street i vote yes thomas halliman my vote is yes james snell my vote is yes
thank you thank you counsel thank you i'll see you later this afternoon
number case number one mi 2022 002 945 1400 inglewood street jennifer bazillo is the attorney
um letter of opposition from community on the rise letter of opposition from take back your
neighbors, which is the affected RCO, applicant did provide a petition of support signed by 34
neighbors. Jennifer Bazidlo is coming back in as a panelist. Good morning, counsel. Good morning.
Give me a second to start my video here. I will. Thank you. Could you state your name,
please and spell for the court stenographer sure jennifer bazidlo b-a-z-y-d-l-o right do you swear
or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth i do could you identify
your client the relationship to this property sure my client is nan wind and he is the property
owner okay our vice chair has just a few questions sure good morning counsel do you agree to weigh
the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy? I do. Have you emailed in all the
required documents and exhibits that is needed to proceed with this case five days in advance
of this hearing? I did. I also sent some supplemental information this morning just
I did. I also sent some supplemental information this morning just for the record that I'll be presenting.
for the record that I'll be presenting.
Okay, thank you. Please proceed. I'll share your screen.
Okay. Let me just get this in a position. Okay.
So, as I said, my name is Jennifer Bazitlow.
I'm here today representing Nan Nguyen, who's a property owner, and also his wife, Kathy Lee.
who is the proposed owner and operator of the business.
So in the packet, I just wanted to briefly go through
and then we'll revisit some important exhibits here.
So our refusal is for the use and also for a sign.
This is the deed showing Mr. Wynn's ownership of the property.
And here we have the tax compliance.
for the property. This was the letter I received. I will mention I am taking over this case from Mr. Young, who went to go work for the DA's office.
So this is the only letter I have in my record. And this was the notice that was sent out to all of the affected neighbors.
and this is our petition of support. There are 34 signatures, all within a few blocks of the
property, 15 of which are on Englewood, which is the affected street here. We're going to come
revisit this, but there is a documented commercial use of this property dating back to 1948,
And these are the exhibits. I also submitted the entire, this is the most recent one, but I submitted an exhibit with all of the records.
Here we have the OPA records, which show that OPA currently is taxing this as a mixed use commercial and residential property.
here we have the listing of when Mr. Wynn bought the property in 2021
showing that it was advertised as a mixed-use commercial property
this is the licenses of Mr. Wynn's wife Kathy Lee who is a licensed nail technician and
esthetician sorry that's a hard word for me to say here are photos of the property of our posting
front, side, and then from the rear, this is the interior of the first floor commercial space.
As you can see, we have separate water heaters, separate electric meters.
This is the property across the street that's also a mixed-use commercial property. We'll return to
this. Just orienting where we are, some photos, and our plans for the ground floor space. As you
see there's three means of exit so I know that's always a concern and the proposed signs on the
second on the on the both sides of the building. So let me just go back to the photos and I'll start
the core of my presentation. So here we have 1400 Anglewood Street. This is at the corner of Anglewood
and Loretto and it's across from Castor Gardens Middle School. The property itself is approximately
1800 square feet. And as you can see we have two units right here. Upstairs is the residential unit
on the second and third floor and that's where Mr. Wynn and his wife both live. And then downstairs
you can see you have a separate entrance for a commercial space. That commercial space is about
785 square feet and does have a documented use as a commercial as a commercial unit dating back to
1948. So let's just go back to these pictures just so you can see the interior again. You can
see that this is a separate unit set up downstairs. So let's just go back to the listing information.
So Mr. Wynn purchased this property in 2021 with the intention to live upstairs and have his wife have a nail salon on the ground floor, as that's what she is licensed to do, and that is her profession.
However, when he purchased this, as you can see, it was advertised as a mixed-use commercial building.
And more importantly, it was also documented with OPA as a mixed use commercial, which is this is then what the city cert came back as when he went to go purchase this property.
And he later discovered that this was not a by right use of the property and in fact was zoned RSA three, which is only for single family residential use.
Our proposal here is to use that ground floor commercial space to keep, they will keep living on the second and third floor and use that ground floor commercial space for a nail salon.
Our proposal here is to use that ground for commercial space.
Let's just go to Ms. Lee's licenses here. So she will be the owner. There will be at most one other employee there with her and the hours of operation will be Monday through Saturday, 930 to 630 p.m.
and it will be by appointment only, no walk-ins. Let's just go to, as I mentioned before,
why this property is zoned for single-family residential use. We have a long history of
commercial use on this property, dating back to the late 1940s, early 1950s is when this property
was approximately when this property was built. Most recently, it was a physical therapist office
with similar signs on the outside. Before that, it was a plumbing office with supply storage,
print shop, candy store, and luncheonette. And 1948, we just have a documentation of Abbott's
dairy. So I'm not really sure what that is, but that's definitely not a residential property.
um if you can see this is this is the entire zoning record here if you wanted to go through
it i did email this to the um to uh the the board this morning um so like i said it's
been commercial for a really long time um we also have 1401 sorry i'm having technical issues getting
to the right tab. One second. 1401 Englewood, let's actually look at the pictures first.
Sorry, one second. Which is also directly across the street, corner of Loretto and Englewood. As
you can see, this is another property at the end of the same development that was set up as a
mixed-use commercial property, as we see a lot of properties like this in the northeast where we
have corner commercial. And this has documentation back to, if you look at the zoning archive,
back to 1935 as a grocery store and continues to the current day as a deli. So again, you have
these corner units that are, have been built, set up and continuously used in a commercial fashion
since at least the 1950s, maybe earlier. So, but they are not zoned for that. And it kind of
appears that they've never been correctly zoned. If they were correctly zoned, you would have some
sort of corner commercial mixed use zoning, like CMX1 or CMX2. And in that zoning district,
a nail salon personal services would be a by right use. And in CMX2, our proposed signs would
also be by right, they're flat wall signs under 25 square feet, one on the side and one on the
front. Admittedly, if it was CMX1, we would be allowed one 15 square foot sign. But so we're not
asking for anything radically out of character with this building and its historic use.
I would argue that having one employee and possibly two clients, in addition to the owner
in this business at one time for limited hours during the day is a much less intensive use than
previous approved uses, such as a physical therapist's office that had multiple employees
and multiple patients, certainly a plumbing office and supply storage where you would have truck
traffic, print shops, same with truck traffic, and going back further, luncheonette and candy store,
that was a constant flow of multiple, many patrons. So we're looking for, you know, to keep in
character with not necessarily what is currently zoned, but the historic use of this property,
and with limited hours and limited number of patrons at a time. The biggest concerns brought
up by the RCO resolve around parking and congestion. And especially parking for the faculty and staff
of the school across the street. So I just wanted to address some of those issues. If we can go back
to my photos. One second here. So if you look at this building here, and particularly if we look
at, I'm sorry, I want to get to the correct photo here, over here, because of the length of this
Over here, because of the length of this building, we have adjacent to this property approximately five parking spaces, four along Loretto and one in front of the property.
building. We have
If we say that the owner is already there, that's one car, and then a potential employee, and maybe two guests, we have four people at this property maximum that need to be parked.
I would argue that this is servicing the community and not everyone might park, but let's assume they do.
This building provides enough parking around it in order to provide those parking spaces.
We also are, if we go to the aerial photos, very close to, sorry, one second.
This is Cotman Avenue right here, one block away, which has additional metered parking for businesses.
I understand that not everyone would want to walk, but we have just presenting all the parking options available.
So, like I said, and as far as providing parking for the school, the school does have a small parking lot.
I also will add if it's a concern for parking for teachers, this business is not opening until 930.
It's middle school. Teachers arrive well before that. They won't be competing with our clients
for parking. They would already be there. I also wanted to say that we do have this documented
second space. So if it wasn't a commercial space, what would it be? Well, on this block alone,
there are four duplexes that have been there since the 1940s and 50s. They are the adjacent
property at 1402. We also have 1411, 1414, excuse me, 1430. And then the property to the rear
on 7221 Loretto is also a duplex. So we have a lot of non-conforming properties here.
So if it wasn't commercial space, it would likely be applied to be maybe a second residential unit, probably two bedrooms, and we would wind up with the same three cars, possibly, but 24 hours a day, not leaving in the evening for people when they come home to work.
For the parking issue, too, I do want to point out that we are in an area with rear drive aisles, and so many of the residents in the area have off-street parking towards the rear, which also relieves some of the parking needs for the residential properties.
And when we go further away from this exact block, you start to see that the block behind is a little less dense and has more parking available to meet needs of the residents.
but basically what this comes down to is that we have a property that is a mixed-use commercial
property. It has been so since it was built in the 1940s and 50s, right, and it is set up in a
fashion that is more conducive to a CMX1 or a CMX2 zoning, and we are asking to use it in that
fashion. And we have limited hours and limited employees. And I really don't think that this
would have a negative impact on the neighborhood, as shown by our petition on letter of support
from 34 of the near neighbors here. I do want to mention that, you know, there was concern about
the school. The school is also zoned RSA 3. It is a pre-existing use, I'm going to assume.
But in RSA 3, a school is not a by right use. So we also have a use that is not a by right use, greatly impacting traffic and congestion in the area.
But that doesn't mean that that prohibits my client from having a small business that they live above and work below.
So, again, just want to reiterate, this has been a mixed-use commercial property since the 40s, and we would like to-
Can you show me where the sign's going to go?
There is-
If we approve it, where would the sign go?
There's one sign in the front that's two by six, and one on the side that's two by 12.
Both are under the 25 square foot, which would be allowed in CMX2, and one is allowed on each side also in CMX2.
Could you bring your client on, please?
Mr. Nguyen, can you raise your hand?
Mr. Nguyen, please unmute yourself.
Yes, I'm here.
You hear me?
Sir, could you state your name and spell, please, for the court stenographer?
Yeah, my name is Yang Nguyen, N-H-A-N, and last name N-G-U-Y-E-N.
Yeah, my name is Nguyen, N-H-A-N, and last name N-G-U.
Right. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
We'll see you, counsel.
Mr. Nguyen, did you hear my testimony here today and believe it to be truthful and accurate?
And would you adopt it as your own?
Yes, ma'am.
Thank you.
Questions from the board?
No, Mr. Chairman.
questions or comments from the virtual audience
i see no hands chair planning commission thank you chair bergman ian hegarty for the philadelphia
city planning commission board members the comprehensive plan recommends no change to
the existing rsa3 single family zoning here however the proposed use is consistent with
both the prior documented legal use and with the physical configuration of the building
City Planning Commission recommends that the board grant the variances.
Thank you. MI 2022-002-945-1400 Englewood. I vote yes and I guess we'll use it as a
proviso to note a variance is also being granted to required parking space for personal services use.
is that correct ryan yes that's correct thank you i'm sorry i'm just a little confused what
that means well my understanding is you were supposed there should have been another refusal
okay for a parking space for service all right thank you so what we're doing is we're taking
note. We're adding that in. Great. Thank you. Thomas Holloman, 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 so much. All right. Number two, MI 2022-005-716-1027-29
Spring Street. Zen Jin is the attorney. Letter of opposition from the coordinating RCO,
Philadelphia Chinatown Development Corporation. Also, they are still in opposition after viewing
revised plans. There's a letter of support from the Asian American Federation of the United States,
And there's a letter of opposition from Council Member Squillip.
Mr. Jin, could you state your name, please, and spell it for the court stenographer?
Yes, my name is Zen Jin, Z-H-Y-N, last name J-I-N, 1617 John F. Kennedy Boulevard, Suite 1838, Philadelphia PA 19103, here on behalf of the applicant.
You swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.
Our vice chair, could you, first of all, identify your client?
Yes, my client is 1027 to 29 Spring LLC.
Mr. Jin Shui-Lin is here on behalf of the LLC.
Okay, our vice chair has just a few questions, sir.
Good morning, counsel.
Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Good morning, and I do waive and stipulate.
Thank you.
Have you emailed them all the required documents and exhibits that is needed to proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing?
I have.
Thank you. Please proceed.
Thank you.
I'm going to share with the board what was submitted on behalf of my client for this application.
Can the board see my exhibit?
Thank you. So we submitted a series of documentation in anticipation of this hearing, a copy of the refusal, various letters, a petition of support, our notification and proof of notification, photos, plans, and related documentation.
This application is in a RM1 district.
The application itself is 1027 to 29 Spring Street, which is actually a double width lot.
consisting of approximately 3,100 square feet.
The proposal was brought before L&I
because my client is next door to
the previous proposal that was actually approved
through the zoning board some years ago
that contains a similar size building
with about 18 units within.
My client originally wanted a little bit bigger building
than what was already next door and proposed for 20 units, triggering the various refusals
that the board has before the board today.
When we met with the PCDC, Philadelphia Times,
When we met with the PCDC, Philadelphia Chinown Development Corporation, originally,
it came to our attention that many of the board members actually either live or own properties
right next to our proposed lot, and there were extensive concerns about this lot being
developed.
Primarily, there were various discussions of construction-related concerns because the
buildings next to us, not towards the 11th Street, but towards 10th Street, is there are older
buildings and there are smaller buildings, and there was concern that the construction would
possibly cause damage or trigger other issues such as light and air for the existing building.
We went back, based on that feedback, and made changes to the plan to reduce the structure
what i'm going to show the board now is the original rendering and plan and then i'll show
the revised plan which shows the reduction so originally my client was envisioning a building
much like the one next to his towards 11th street but based on the overall height and design
we realized of course yes the building would sit above the building next door and certainly will
be a lot taller than the ones on the other side which are three-story structures. However, it is
not really out of place in Chinatown for this kind of development. Chinatown has a lot of development
that is denser and higher than what we normally see in other parts of the city. Upon learning of
the feedback from the community, my client went back with his architect to make a few changes to
adjust the property. There are a few things that he did, and I will kind of run through the list
here for the board, one of which is we lowered the building to match the taller building towards
11th Street in height. So we now have a similar height building. In addition, the balconies that
were originally proposed are completely removed, giving us a little more open space. Another piece
that was discussed more than once
through communication with PCDC
is that the facade was too modern.
PCDC felt the facade was too modern
and did not fit the look of the existing properties.
So the architect went back
and revised the design to have brick facade
and a cornice line that sort of matches
the lower buildings
to take away some of the bulk feel on the facade.
Another major discussion initially, besides density itself, was the handling of the trash that would come from a building of this size.
In fact, I believe one of the letters that was sent in recently from the building next door specifically indicates issues and concerns with that.
Now, with the layout, we proposed changes to handle that issue.
One of the discussion was that the alleyway behind us that we originally thought could
be used to pull trash out to the street, both the building next door and the other neighbors
have indicated that people have been using that and blocking it often, so it will be
difficult to get our dumpsters out that way.
So what we had done instead is to revise the first floor design to put an enclosed trash
room right towards the front, towards Spring Street, where the trash truck would have to
be, regardless of whether the trash is stored in the back or front, they'll have to be pulled
to Spring Street for us and for other buildings.
So we made it easier to make it directly accessible from the front of the property.
Thus, eliminating the need of using the back at all for trash removal purposes.
We also reduced the number of units from 20 to 17 with the understanding, of course, that, and this was brought to PCDC's attention, that my client would be willing to enter into an agreement with them for low-income housing for a certain number of units.
That discussion was never moved forward before we appeared to the board today. While we proposed it, the discussion was not really, we couldn't get a second meeting to have that discussion in detail with PCDC regarding the possibility of affordable housing offsetting some of the density that we're proposing.
Essentially, because of concerns with construction and the size of the building as it is, and the strong opposition from certain board members.
And the strong opposition from certain board members, PCDC took a position that there's no need for us to have another meeting with them regarding this proposal.
Also, what my client did in response to knowing of that situation is he actually went out and reached out to the neighbors that are owners of properties throughout Chinatown.
Now, Chinatown's unique in some sense in that while the buildings are owned, most of the buildings around us are owned by one individual, maybe multiple addresses.
It's the way Chinatown is kind of set up with ownership.
And most of these buildings are, in fact, multifamily in nature as well with relatively high density.
But as you can see, he went to various addresses that is on the list surrounding the property and obtained signatures of support from various owners within Chinatown of these properties.
And that's, again, something that my client felt was always the feedback that he received when he started thinking of doing this building, because a lot of people in Chinatown feel they want to keep the residents of Chinatown at enough of a level that people can stay within Chinatown itself and live within Chinatown.
So, again, these. So, so, counsel, let me just raise one issue with you. Sure. We do have a note in the file here that the signatures on several of them look like the same person signed.
They are. Yes. Yes. That's why I was kind of alluding to during my testimony that because a lot of these, in fact, I'll go up to a page where it's clear that's the situation.
For example, Mabel and Wei Chen owns multiple properties within the area.
And that's kind of the case here in the surrounding area that a few people tend to own quite a few of the properties.
That is also true, I think, of our neighbors, in fact, of this property.
They don't just own the property next door.
They may also own a few properties further down the street or in other parts of Chinatown.
And this is a very common.
And unfortunately, it is the way Chinatown's ownership kind of splits up.
So, again, we have the petition.
Yes, again, you'll see that multiple properties are owned by the same owner.
So because of that situation as well is why Chinatown has a lot more of these larger proposed developments.
There are not that much real estate left to develop.
And when you want to develop it, while we understand RM1's limitations, if we built RM1 limitations, it's really not that viable a development from the perspective of long-term use or enough density really to fulfill the needs of what my client's seeing in Chinatown.
The additional units would allow some more affordable units to be added.
However, if we were forced to build a smaller structure, he would have to redo his calculation
to see whether it's even a feasible project at that point.
So we understand, of course, the concerns of the neighbor, particularly the older, smaller
buildings next door of construction.
What we did advise at the time we presented to PCDC is that if zoning is not something that's going to move forward, construction, to ask my client now to do the engineering for foundational engineering, bracing of the structure, these are usually construction-related matters that we would address.
And certainly we would make sure the buildings next door would be covered and not damaged.
Our building, in fact, in design, and I'll jump back to the plans again, just to kind of highlight that.
I'm sorry, that's the proviso form.
Our building, by design, have left an actual space between our building and the next door to try to reduce impact of any kind of construction.
uh their their space left on both ends where it abuts actual building next door so that there if
there was foundational digging we would not be digging close to their wall and therefore affecting
uh their structural integrity those are older buildings and we certainly understand their
concerns about constructions uh legitimate i also want to point out that again we
I also want to point out that, again, we understand that this is a RM1 district.
However, it is heavily surrounded by CMX 3 and CMX 4.
So this lot, being already next to a large building, is forever going to be kind of enclosed
surrounding by large buildings.
And while we understand that doesn't justify building a larger building, it does also
triggered a hardship to us in our contemplation of what projects to place, what size buildings
to place into this currently vacant lot. And that is the reason my client asked for
this particular size project. And I believe he is here to verify my testimony. And I believe
the architect may also be available for any specific questions. Why don't we bring your
client on. Sure. Mr. Linn, can you raise your hand virtually to be identified?
And excuse me, Chair, if I may, this is Ms. Dandy. We have a Gary Lee in the audience. He
is an attorney for the protestant. Okay, so let's bring his
client on first to adopt this testimony.
Mr. Linn, you're free to speak.
yes yes can you hear me i see sir could you state your name and spell it please for the
court stenographer yeah my name is jim suiting j-i-n-s-h-u-i-l-i-m right do you swear or firm
to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth yet i told the truth okay thank you
counsel. Thank you. Mr. Lin, did you see my presentation and hear my testimony before the
zoning board? Yes. Before we do that, can you verify what I said so far to be true and correct
and adopted as your own testimony? Mr. Lee, Mr. Lee, Mr. Lee, we'll get to you. You haven't
been sworn in yet i i will uh i will get to you okay okay thank you your honor it's true it's true
thank you um i believe my client wanted to uh make a statement however i think with the other
council president maybe we should let him uh start first thank you council could you state your name
please. Gary Lee. I'm representing Ryan Lee. Thank you. Do you swear or affirm to tell the
truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth? I do. Proceed, sir. Yes. I was, ever since this
case started, I raised my hand to try to get heard. And I understand I'm not objecting to what
you're heard now. I understand that, your honor. So one of the things I wish to raise is Mr.
Mr. Jen has been saying a lot of things that are hearsay, and I object to that, and I object to his testifying as a lawyer under the code.
He can only testify if the people agree, and we do not agree to that.
The statements he made about the Chinatown residents and what they felt and how they operate and any kind of hardship that's going to be supposedly incurred by his clients, those are all hearsay, and he's not qualified to make those statements.
And as a lawyer, he's not permitted to testify without the agreement of all parties.
So I object to that.
So we, Mr. Lee, we're going to accept Mr. Jin's testimony.
Now you can present your side.
Thank you, Your Honor.
Mr. Jin, can you please put up your exhibits again?
Excuse me, Mr. Lee.
I'm going to go ahead and promote you to a panelist.
Thank you.
Just let me know which page of the exhibit you wish to have it directed to.
Right.
Can you please turn to Exhibit 7, page 2, which is PDF 42, I believe?
Are you talking about the plans?
He's coming back in as a panelist.
this is there right sure thank you very much yeah I'm sorry are you um directing to the plans is that
what you're looking yes that's what I'm looking at so that that plan shows a rendering of the
height of the building that you're proposing to build is that right yes these are the original
plans with original rendering yes and also can we get that back on screen that same page uh you
want to go back to this one yes that one okay and that shows adjacent to it are three properties
Adjacent to it are three properties. It's 1025A, 1025A and B, I mean, 1023A and B, and 1021A and B. Is that correct?
It's 1025A, 1025A.
That's correct.
And those are all, at most, three-story properties?
Okay. Can you please turn to Exhibit 8, page 1? I believe it's PDF 46.
i think it's the photo that you like the rendering this one go back a little yes that's right right
there okay and that also shows that on the left in the middle of the page there it shows
the proposed project that you plan to build correct
yes that's correct and then next to it it's grayed out and it's right at the right edge of the of the
picture that shows if it were not grayed out and if you can look at it a little bit deeper
that shows 1025 a spring street correct this one here yes yes and that shows the relative
height between that and your proposed project right that's that does show it for the original
proposal yes yeah can you also turn to pdf 47 which is exhibit eight page two
you i believe i'm going to shrink it back down
page two the um this one if you scroll down let's go up a little bit sure um yes right okay so
looking at the top near the center, there's a front elevation, and that shows on the left-hand
side your proposed, not clear enough, it shows your proposed building in relation to what's next
door, which is 1025A Spring Street, correct? Right. I just want to point out these were amended.
have you seen the revised plans these these are these are in fact the original proposal we're not
denying that okay then let's let's go to um let's go to exhibit nine page two pdf 52
that's the current plan correct yes that's the current plan and if you look at let me uh let
me zoom into the elevation so it's easier to see yes so we're looking at the elevation and we're
looking at the and that's 62 feet up until the time when you up it's 62 feet from the ground to
part of the roof and then when you add the the parapet that's another nine feet correct
i don't believe the parapet's nine feet that that might be the elevator shaft access that's the
additional nine feet. Okay. So it's elevator shaft access. Anyhow, it's, you revised the building
proper to be 62 feet. And that again, if you look at the right-hand side, which is 1025A Spring
Street, that shows the relative size between the two, the two, your proposed building and 1025A,
correct? Yes, that's correct. Now, to the west of the property, 1027-1029 Spring Street
is an apartment building, which has an address of 1031 Spring Street, correct? Correct. And the west
side of that apartment building borders on clifton street correct uh yes i believe that's
correct you're talking about the uh little uh this here clifton street it's a small small street
but you agree that yes it does building 1031 spring street the west side is bordered by
clifton street on the west yes and between it and 1025 a spring street is your client's lot
which is currently a parking lot and it's 1027-1029 spring street correct yes and the width
between the the width of your property is 36 feet eight inches is that correct
i believe that should be correct i would have to verify on the plans
well if you look at the deed yeah it's uh yes that is correct it's 36 feet 8 inches yeah okay now
and would you agree that the apartment building at 1031 at 1031 spring street
at 1031 at 1031 spring street
has five units
i'm sorry 1031 spring you're talking about the one that you are that's to the west of your
client's property uh no i wouldn't agree that only has five units the city record shows it
has 18 approved units.
That's all the questions I have, Your Honor, at this time from Mr. Chen.
Thank you.
You want to go back to your client?
All right.
Why don't we go back to your client?
is mr linds still available available to testify
one moment i'm getting him now okay thank you
hello um this is ryan lee uh owner of 1025 a spring street uh ryan sorry sorry you just can't
i'm i'm gonna bring the client back in no problem you'll have a chance later when i go to the
audience, okay? Is your client coming in, Zen? I believe he should still be here. Mr. Leng,
can you raise your hand to be identified again so you can testify? He's just been allowed to see.
Oh, okay. Yes, yes. You've already been sworn. Just state your name for the record.
J-I-M-S-H-U-I-L-I-M
Oh, that's fine. Thank you. Go ahead, Shenzhen.
Thank you. Mr. Lin, you indicated earlier you wanted to make a statement regarding your proposal.
Can you let the board know why you're proposing a building of this size in Chinatown?
I'm sorry. Chairman, he may need a
translator to help?
Is it possible for a translator
to get online with him?
I think I'll
check, but we usually have to order them well in advance.
And that's correct here.
Is it possible
you can testify somewhat, you can
slow down and testify in
English?
My English is not that well.
Okay, so we have another partner of the business here
who may speak better English.
Maybe we can have him state the...
He owns part of the building, you're saying?
He owns part of the property, yes.
So Jack...
What's his name?
Mr. Lin, can you tell us the full name of the individual to be identified?
Jack...
Jack Xiao.
Jack Xiao.
Yes. Okay. It's Jack, J-A-C-K, Shao, X-I-A-O.
He's been allowed to speak. He just has to unmute himself.
Hi, Shao. Could you state your name and spell, please, for the corticinographer?
Yeah, please unmute so you can speak.
uh this is jack sound my last name you state could state your name and then spell please
for the court sonographer jack sound last name is spelled xs x-ray i-a-o do you swear a firm
to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth yes proceed counsel thank you
Mr. Shao, it's my understanding that you wanted to give the board a statement regarding your
desire to build this particular structure at this location. I'm actually translating for Mr.
Lin is what they were telling me to do. He can't do that. You cannot, unfortunately,
you cannot do that. We would have to order a translator. That would be a different,
that would be a different hearing altogether
if we had to go do that.
Can you summarize any statement
that Mr. Lin wanted to make on his behalf?
I'm not sure we can do that even.
I don't believe we can do that.
Okay. All right. Thank you.
All right.
Mr. Jin, do you want to close your case out?
Is that it?
I don't know if anybody else was present
relating to my clients.
relating to uh my clients um i i do understand i'm going to open it up to the virtual audience
I do understand that.
I'm going to open it up
to the virtual audience.
yeah thank you after that okay all right questions from the board no chair
no chair no mr no mr chairman questions or comments from the virtual audience yes here we
have ryan lee hi mr lee could you state your name please and spell it for the court stenographer
Hi, my name is Ryan Lee.
It is R-Y-A-N-L-E-E.
Right.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Are you a neighbor?
Mr. Chair, Mr. Ryan Lee is my client, just to let you know.
So I had planned to examine him.
Well, why don't we do this?
Why don't we let him make a statement?
Then you can question him, okay?
Thank you.
yes uh it again may overlap into what uh gary is saying in terms of testimony but uh mr jen can you
also uh pull up the plans um earlier in your testimony you stated that you know there were
growing concerns of of uh adjacent properties being um possibly damaged during the construction
I just want to, I do realize the setback that you have up at the front where 1025A Spring Street is.
However, that cut in of the east side of the building where that bump out is, that is directly up against the basement of 1025A Spring Street.
The building that you proposed earlier, which is the seven-story building, did not have a basement.
And it seems that the building that you're proposing now does have a basement, which causes a deeper foundation.
And I think this is a very big concern in terms of building this next to, I can tell you, my building has a basement of a depth of four feet.
And when you're going down deeper than that, I think that's a major concern.
Also, I feel that this building's height is very much a big difference between 1025A and this proposed building in that it would overshadow a lot of natural sunlight that it's given towards the rear of the buildings of 1025A Spring Street and B.
um that's those are pretty much my concerns from the testimony that you have given earlier
mr lee do you want to follow up with questions yes your honor thank you very much go ahead
mr lee um you own do you own 10 15 a spring street 10 25 i'm sorry a spring correct i do and
my sister does. And she agrees with opposing this application? She does, yep. And you are
right next door to 1027-1029, is that correct? Correct. And next to 10, so behind you is 1025B
Spring Street, is that right? That's correct. They enter in through Spring Street onto a little alley
that is beneath, it's sort of like a shared property for them to enter the rear towards
that area. And between 1025A, which is your building, and the one behind it, 1025B,
is there any property, any land? There is a, I guess they would say a yard that is separated
by a CMU wall. Also, what's not shown in this image that's up on the screen is there is a little
a two-story building footprint that is not shown properly on this plan that is a part of 1025A
Spring Street. And do you own, is part of 1025A Spring Street not only the building but the yard
that is in the back of that building correct and next to 1025 a spring street there are two other
properties that front on spring street is that correct uh could you ask that question again yes
to the on to on spring street 1025 a 1025 a spring is your unit and to going towards 10th street
there are two other buildings. Is that correct? Two other addresses. Correct. Yes. And one of
them is 1023. And that also has an A and a B. And the other one is 1021. And that also has an A and
And the other one is 1021. And that also has an A and a B. Is that correct?
to be. Is that correct?
That's correct. To my knowledge.
And separating both the A and B units of 1023 and 1020 and 1021 are yards. Is that correct?
and the size of those properties 1021 1023 10 1015 a and b all those properties those are
around three stories correct yes now your property does your property have any windows
on the back part of your building it does it has uh approximately five windows facing the north
and then i have two windows facing the west that's pointing towards the new proposed building
so the the windows that are facing the west if someone looked out them they would directly see
the east side of the proposed building. Is that right? Correct. Now,
would a building of the size that is proposed, 61 feet, would that have an effect on the light
and air available to your property, both your building and your yard? It would. I would think
it's a pretty big concern. Would it be a significant effect on that? I would say it's
significant. And also the open space that is proposed, which is 12.2% rather than the 25%
required by the code, depending upon where that was, would that also result in more light and air
if there were more open space? Yes, I would say it essentially closes up the yards that are
occurring in that area. And then also there's the apartments that are being proposed
would, if there's 17 units and there are two bedroom and one bedroom units, which is at least
30 units, would that result in any, how would that affect the traffic that uses Spring Street?
I would say it would increase congestion from residents that would need to park in the area,
deliveries, whether it be, I don't know, food or mail, I think it would increase congestion in
that area. And would having that many residents, would that also have an effect on the trash,
the amount of trash? Yes, I would be concerned about how often it's being removed, being that
across the street, there already is a lot of congested, overflowing trash that occurs
during pickup days. And then also, were you present when the applicant presented before the
PCDC, which is the Registered Community Organization in this matter?
Yes, I was present for that meeting for the proposal of the previous seven-story building.
And did you raise any concerns about how the construction was going to be done?
I did. Mr. Lee, can you briefly state your educational background?
I have a bachelor's of science in civil engineering. I practice structural engineering
for, I would say, four or five-story office buildings for about 16 years, and I recently
changed into fields with uh of data center planning and when you've read what you did
you read the plans in this case i did i reviewed them earlier this week when they were when they
were sent to me and and are you qualified by your education experience to read plans
i would say so yes and the way the plans are are drawn there is a there is an intention to
have a full basement in 1027-1029 spring street is that correct correct yeah and then again i am
concerned about that depth of uh how deep they are digging adjacent to structures that are not as deep
and what what is can you describe your basement yeah i think he already did didn't he say four
foot when he testified correct four foot uh you you probably you basically uh walk up to the
first floor for a few steps and yeah it's it's visible during the uh the street view of the
during the uh the street view of the building and as a structural engineer what is your opinion of
building and as a structure
Thank you.
how the a full basement making uh the excavation for a full basement would have enough have on
1025 the building on 1025 a spring street i think that there are very large risks and and
and very big impacts that could occur during the construction of this building
Being that 1025A and I'm guessing surrounding buildings are just as old that the existing, you know, my existing basement is I found to be a rubble foundation wall.
So I have very big concerns in terms of what is being placed over in this area as part of construction, where these vehicles are being located.
I have great concerns.
And did you have any experience with the building of 1031 Spring Street?
I do not, no.
I did not take ownership of 1025A when that was being built.
That's all I have at this time, Your Honor. Thank you. Thank you. Mr. Jin, do you have any follow-up
questions? Yes, just a few brief questions. Mr. Lee, your windows facing the west,
are those on your property line? They are a bit setback. I don't have the exact distance,
but it might be around, if I'm guessing, eight, seven, eight feet. Okay. So from that property
line. Yep. So would you agree that if a by right building was put there, that those windows would
be facing the same walls as we would be talking about with a larger structure? There will be a
wall basically at the same distance that you're looking at now with this proposal
i'm not sure i understand that question so if a building is put up that's three story tall
yes and built to the property line as it would be permitted your windows would still be blocked
the same way on the uh i'm not so sure but when you when you're talking about sunlight right uh
You have your source light coming from above, not so much. Yes. When you're, if you're talking about your visual, your visual setting of what a person is looking outside the window, then yes, I'm concerned about sunlight.
Okay. With regard to the basement, you're a civil engineer yourself. Have you done any projects involving digging of foundations and other similar structures?
I have, yes.
And would you agree that if a professional is involved, that safety measures can be taken to prevent damage?
Yes, I would need to know what they are, because taking precautions and what those construction sequences are, they have every little bit to do with how the adjacent building reacts.
Correct. But you would agree that if a professional was involved and did their job, that a construction can be done safely in this situation.
If you were involved with the basement next door and you required the proper precautions, would that basement be able to be put in safely? I guess that would be my question.
I would if it were, yeah, I would if it were set back appropriately enough, yes.
And potentially brace properly with necessary bracings to prevent any damage to the neighboring properties.
And I guess that would be all I need to, that's all of my questions.
Thank you, board.
Thank you.
Is there anyone else in the virtual audience?
Yes, Chair. We have Carolyn, last name beginning in A.
Hi, could you state your name, please, as spell for the court stenographer?
Good morning. My name is Caroline Ong, C-A-R-O-L-I-N-E-A-U-N-G, from the Philadelphia.
Do you swear for them to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Are you in favor of the project or against?
um so i'm representing the rco uh philadelphia okay fine thank you corporation and um i'd like
to testify on behalf of the rco yes please go ahead um yes so as you know the rco voted to
Yes, so as you know, the RCO voted to oppose the proposed project at 1027 to 29 Spring Street.
oppose the proposed project
To reiterate, the RCO believes the applicant has not sufficiently demonstrated hardship for seeking the zoning variance
and that even taking into consideration the revised plans, the proposed project is too high
and would create undesirable density on a street that consists primarily of three-story row homes.
And while the applicant did point out that there are some buildings near the western end of the street with similar height and density, the developer proposes an infill development adjacent to a line of three-story row homes.
And the RCO has expressed the need to maintain the small scale residential nature of the eastern side of the street, which is close to 10th Street and near Chinatown's neighborhood core.
Thank you very much for your comments and calling in.
Mr. Jin, do you have any questions?
Mr. Lee, do you have any questions?
Mr. Lee, you're muted.
You're muted.
No, Your Honor.
Thank you.
Thank you very much for calling in. Is there anyone else in the virtual audience?
I'm sorry, Chair. This is Tanya. May I ask again for the RCO's name to be put on the record? It wasn't very clear to me.
It's Philadelphia Chinatown Development Corporation.
Thank you very kindly.
Is there anyone else in the virtual audience?
Yes, Chair. We have Grace Kong.
Hi, could you state your name and spell, please, for the court stenographer?
Grace Kong, K-O-N-G.
Right.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Are you a neighbor?
All right.
Are you in favor of the project or against?
Against.
Could you give us a short reason why?
My family and I are the owner of 1025B Spring Street.
And we have been living there for the past 30 years.
and their house has been built since 1930s so I just feel having a structure this height and
magnitude that will when they're in construction it will be detrimental to the properties in the
area surrounding like all the buildings on you know next to it because we're older building and
our foundation is weak and and it's not as strong as you know a lot of the you know especially our
basement is really um you know this we need to you know do a lot of work and to have all that
drilling and uh building i think is going to be very detrimental to the structure and the
foundation damages to the surrounding you know properties thank you and when i live there
it always have been a you know uh you know uh family oriented residential uh street you know
to have like a commercial you know building coming in and especially with the traffic coming in is
you know we have all they have enough uh problem you know finding parking and to have that you know
i think it's going to be really detrimental to to the uh our area and the street all right thank
you very much for calling in mr jen do you have any questions uh no mr lee do you have any questions
no your honor thank you is there anyone else in the virtual audience see no he is chair
Planning Commission. Thank you, Chair Bergman. Ian Hegarty for the Philadelphia City Planning
Commission. Board members, in 2014, the zoning map was amended from CMX-3 to RM-1 in this area.
We believe the applicant's hardship claims not supported with evidence of unique physical
circumstances or conditions of the property that would prevent it from being used in conformance
with the code. The adjacent non-conforming development is not grounds for hardship and
nor is the presence of more permissive zoning districts in the vicinity.
The zoning map here has been intentionally reconfigured to have RM1 on this block face.
With regard to the dwelling unit count, we believe the application would have been eligible
for the mixed income housing bonus and green roof bonuses, but neither is being used here.
Applicants are asking the board to allow additional dwelling units on this site,
despite not providing the required benefits.
With regard to the proposed height variance, the proposed height of 71 feet is 33 feet higher than permitted.
We don't believe sufficient evidence has been presented to explain why such a significant difference is necessary to enable viable economic use of the property or why this is the minimum necessary variance.
So the City Planning Commission recommends that the Board deny these variances.
Mr. Haggerty, thank you for your comments.
For both counsel, thank you for your comments.
I'm going to take this to the executive session next Wednesday.
I'm going to take this to the executive session next Wednesday, and we will vote on this at 930 a.m. next Wednesday.
And thank you both, Army.
Thank you.
But I don't I didn't hear whether or not the exhibits that Mr.
Jinn proffered were going to be offered in evidence.
I think I said they were.
I think I said that.
OK, I wasn't sure that I said everything he put in, it's going to be in.
but we're going to take this to executive session, discuss it among ourselves. We will vote next
Wednesday at 9.30 a.m. Okay, Your Honor, I do have an objection. Again, I joined this late to
Exhibit 12, an exhibit on the basis of hearsay. So Exhibit 12 is the appeal document to the
Zoning Board of Adjustment, and it contains hearsay. And I only object to the extent that
the statements in the reasons for the appeal and the statements given for the granting of the
variance be considered by the board for the truth of what they say. If Mr. Jin agrees that it's only
to provide notice to the board of what he's contending, I don't have an objection. But if
they're being offered for the truth, as if everything he says there is true and has already
been proved, I object on the ground of hearsay. We're presenting that to the board. Mr. Jin,
Mr. Jinn, I hear your comments, Mr. Lee, but I am accepting what he put in.
And we will look at everything that's been said, take this into consideration, and we will vote next Wednesday at 9.30 a.m.
Thank both of you.
Thank you.
And excuse me, Chair, if I may, this is Mr. Jinn.
The record is closed otherwise.
Oh, absolutely.
The record is closed.
Thank you.
Number three, MI-2023-001-266-112 North 2nd Street, number 5A1, Matthew Monroe is the attorney.
Recommendation of support from the Old City District.
Letter of non-opposition from Councilman Squillett.
Mr. Monroe.
Hi, Mr. Monroe.
Monroe, could you state your name, please, and spell it for the court stenographer?
Sure thing. Good morning, Chairman Bergman, members of the board, Matthew Monroe, M-A-T-T-H-E-W-M-O-N-R-O-E, on behalf of the applicant.
All right. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Could you identify your client in a relationship to this property?
uh yes your honor uh and if you if you may just a second while i share my screen um
is my screen coming up here it is it's fine okay i'm uh joined today by steven caladrino
who is a representative of the uh the owner um uh which is the uh commercial space located at
112 North 2nd Street. This is unit number 5A1. The proposal is for a retail sale of specialty
paired Italian foods. Mr. Monroe, our vice chair just has a few questions for you first.
Good morning, counsel. Do you agree to wait 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 did.
Thank you. Please proceed. You have already shared your screen.
Thank you. And yes, so Chairman Bergman, this is a simple use change for the commercial space.
And is my volume coming in okay?
You're fine. You're fine. It's fine this time. All right. Thank you.
Great. This is a simple use change for commercial space located at 112 North 2nd Street. This is at the National East Condominium Complex. It's a 193-unit apartment complex condo building.
And this is a proposed use for the retail sale of specially prepared foods, Italian foods and wines for on site and off site consumption.
And like I said, this is a mixed use building and this is a commercial space.
I'll just run quickly through the documents that we presented.
And over here we we have the deed.
The referral. This is for a special exception.
this is in old city and pursuant supplemental use controls in the city city center city overlay
district we have our application for appeal as well as the project information form filled out
the rco notice letter which went out and we had a well-attended meeting from the old with the old
city district rco and here's our certificate of bulk mailing we posted the property appropriately
as you can see. And then we have some site plans and just photos for the use.
And then we have some site plans and just photos for the use. And here's our support letter. And then we do have a tax clearance showing zero tax balance for the property.
um and chairman bergman as i mentioned this is just a simple use change and there have been
other similar businesses that operated in this area without any impact on streets or transportation
we submit that this special exception will not cause any congestion congestion in the public
streets or transportation uh systems beyond what would be expected for a normal user
there have been other similar businesses in the area that have operated without any impact
And there was one business, a business located at 227 Market Street, and that was under use permit number 610617.
It was a similar Italian grocer and wine store called Pino.
They closed due to COVID, and Mr. Calendrino and his partners are the commercial owners of this space.
And they've been marketing the space and trying to find a user for it and had been unable to do so.
So rather than to try to keep the empty space, they decided to bring in a use that was now missing from the neighborhood that was popular at the time and to sort of provide an amenity for the community.
And so they are going to be the owner operators themselves of the space.
and we submit that the proposed use will have no material impact on the public streets or systems.
Foot traffic is a primary means of travel down in Old City. People will get there by Uber and
the occupancy is a CMX3 zoning district and this will you know attract a relatively small crowd but
a dedicated crowd but it's not you're not going to see like the type of crowding that you see
outside of like nightclubs or anything like that. It's just a small Italian store. Other by right
uses have been had similar occupances in the area. This was last used as yoga studio. It's been dark
for a little while now. And there's other uses in the area that we're all living in the city
are familiar with. ICI, Macarons Cafe, among others. It's not going to impact the adequate
air supply of air and light because it's to use change only no changes to the exterior of the
building and um we also submit that there's not going to be any impact on the water and sewer
system in part this is well this is going to be a grocery store um there's not going to be any
cooking or venting so there's not going to be grease or food waste impacting um uh the sewer
water waste lines um the shop is just going to be serving an amenity in the community and um with
that. Why don't you bring your client on? Yes, and Mr. Calendrino, if you could just raise your
virtual hand, please. Stephen Calendrino has been allowed to speak. Hi, sir. Could you state your
name, please, and spell for the court stenographer? Calendrino, S-T-E-P-H-E-N-C-A-L-A-N-B-R-I-N-O.
do you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth
i do uh thank you uh mr calendrina did you hear the factual statements that i made for the record
yes um and uh to your knowledge were they accurate yes do you adopt them as your testimony
yes thank you questions from the board no mr chairman
no chair questions or comments from the virtual audience
i see no hands chair planning commission thank you chair ian hegarty for the philadelphia city
planning commission board members the comprehensive plan recommends no change to the existing cmx3
zoning we believe the proposed use will not cause detrimental impacts to the neighborhood
beyond what normally might be expected for the use and so the city planning commission
recommends that the board grant this special exception. Thank you. MI 2023-001-266-112
North 2nd Street, number 5A1, I vote yes. Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes. James Snell,
my vote is yes. Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes. Thank you. Thank you, counsel. Thank you.
Number six, MI-2022-005-715-1801 Rittner Street.
Zen Jin is the attorney.
There's a letter of support from the Drada State Neighbors Association.
Mr. Jin, just state your name for the record, please.
You've already been sworn.
good afternoon good morning it's almost after just state your name for the record please
Good morning.
It's almost afternoon.
yes zen jin on behalf of the applicant okay could you identify your client and the relationship to
the property yes uh my client is uh mr yi jiao and miss lee ball they're the owner of the property
okay and our vice chair has just a few questions for you sir
good morning counsel do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to
with accuracy. Good morning, and I do. I've emailed in all the required documents and exhibits that
are needed to proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing. Yes. Thank you. Please
proceed. Thank you. I'm sharing the documentation we previously submitted to the board. This is
an application that we submitted the refusal, support letter, photos, and plans. This is an
application for use as a two-family dwelling in a RSA 5 zoning district. However, I want to point
out that this was previously a CMX district in the history of the records, and that's kind of
what led us to this application today. So looking at the community support letter, when we presented
this to the RCO, they're well aware of the history of the property, that it was for many years
used as a resident above and an office below.
The property itself is structurally separated
for many years because it was essentially
a commercial mixed-use property.
The property is a corner property as well.
So the fact that it was commercially mixed-use
is not unusual because it is a corner property
and many such properties in Philadelphia
was structured this way.
Currently, the property below,
in fact, right before it was sold to my client,
It was used as an office.
However, the owner actually put a kitchen in the back part of the property, which at
the time was a legal commercial use as an office, and essentially made it into what
looked like a residential property without structurally changing much of the interior
layout.
They had a front office, a rear office, and a kitchen bathroom, which once they vacated,
the office use looked much like a one-bedroom apartment.
So when my client purchased the property, she was under the impression that, I'm sorry, I don't know why I didn't jump to the plans.
Let me, okay, I'll have to scroll to the plans.
I'm sorry.
So you can see in the pictures that, again, the property itself on the first floor is structured, typical of commercial mixed use.
It had the two water heaters, two electric meters.
All these were in place previous to my client purchasing it.
From the layout inside, as you can see here, I'm going to zoom in for the board.
You have what is essentially a front room, hallway, kitchen.
There is a storage, so trash is kept inside, even if it was used as a residential.
The second floor has a separate entrance altogether, leading with a stair up to the second floor.
The community supported our request to simply make this two residential units.
That corner is not really active commercially, nor does the neighbors really want an active commercial use there.
Therefore, they supported our request to simply use the first floor as one residential unit and the second floor, which is an existing residential unit, to remain.
And that is, in fact, what we're proposing to the board.
I would point out there would be a hardship to convert this to an actual single-family house because of existing structure, and this is not something my client created.
And that concludes my testimony on this matter.
I do have my client here to verify my testimony.
Bring your client on, please.
Thank you.
Ms. Lee or Mr. Zhao, if you're here, please raise your hand virtually.
Mr. Zhao is free to speak.
Hi, sir.
Could you state your name and spell for the court stenographer?
Hi, my name is Ye Zhao.
I'm sorry.
My apologies.
I must have gotten the names confused.
Okay, that's okay.
That's okay.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Yes, sir.
Could you spell your name, please, for the stenographer?
Yeah, first name is Ye-Y-E, last name is Zhao, Z-H-A-O.
Proceed, counsel.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Ms. Zhao, can you verify that you saw my presentation and heard my testimony before
the board?
Yes, I did.
Thank you.
And can you verify that they're true and correct and adopted as your own testimony?
Yeah, all true.
Thank you.
Questions from the board?
No, Chairman.
No, Mr. Chairman.
questions or comments from the virtual audience i see no handshare planning commission thank you
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
chair ian hegarty for the philadelphia city planning commission board members the comprehensive plan
recommends no change to the existing rsa 5 single family zoning however the property has a recorded
prior legal use as one commercial unit and one residential unit the proposed use as we've seen
is also consistent with the physical configuration of the building. The City Planning Commission
recommends that the Board grant the variance. MI 2022-005-715-1801-Vritner Street, 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. All right, number eight,
MI-2022-004-352-3743 North 18th Street.
Joseph Consul is the attorney.
Letter of support from the 13th Ward RCO Committee with an enforceable proviso.
Joseph Consul is coming back in as a panelist.
Good morning, Mr. Consul.
Could you state your name, please, and spell for the court stenographer?
Good morning, Ward.
Joe Consul.
that's j-o-s-e-p-h-c-o-n-s-o-l-e do you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth and
nothing but the truth i do proceed sir all right that share my packet yes okay um so we're here
today on three seven four three north 18th street um oh do i need to testify to sending the my things
Yeah, why don't you just say what you did? That's all.
We submitted everything five days in advance.
The property owner is Gaint Properties, LLC.
My client is Mr. Gangan Cahill, and he's on this call to adopt my testimony later.
Thank you, Mr. Counsel. Proceed.
37-43 North 18th.
This property was originally zoned as a multifamily or approved as a multifamily in 1950.
It is set up right now as a three-unit property.
This block was rezoned at some point as a single family property. And so my client purchasing it as a three unit requires him to get a variance to use it as three units.
So here's the refusal. We went in front of the RCO twice. The first time we presented our plans, they asked for some follow up, which is all included in their letter.
we got full support both from the four members of the board and the um seven members of the
community that were at um the final meeting they sent a letter that just laid out a few items that
my client would do regarding upkeep and um safety ladders i know that they they're big on uh having
ladders installed in these units um and things that my client agreed to not nothing i believe
relevant for provisos or anything like that but i just wanted to point that out so we got their
support it's proof of mailing photos and plans of the property
and we included the uh layout of the three two-bedroom units one two and three on each
of the three floors. It's a 1500 square foot property. So my assumption, and I'll run through
that in a second, is that this whole block was multifamily at one point, and now it's single
family. And then all of our other documents are following that. I won't belabor the point. So I'm
just going to show you our side of the block. But basically, every house that appears to be
standing appears to be multifamily. So here's a three unit at 3, 7, 6, 5. Here's a three unit at
3, 7, 6, 1. Here is a three unit at 3, 7, 5, 7. Here's an old zoning approval for a three family
at 3755. And again, 3753, 3751, 3749. Here's an old six-unit approval for 3739, 3733, 3729,
nine, uh, three, seven, two, seven. And finally three.
3-7-2-7, and finally 3-7-1-9-North-18.
So that's just our side of the block.
In the interest of time, I didn't submit the other side of the block,
which is also zoned single-family,
but has a similar number of active multifamily uses, three and above.
And so I just wanted to give everyone a taste of the block
and just to show that it is primarily a multifamily block
and therefore approving this use we believe is in line with the rest of the block and
the hardship being that the property you know at one point was approved as a multi-family
and so that they're seeking to get that re-approved as as such that's it
could you bring your client on please is your client here Mr. Consul yeah Mr. Cahill can you
raise your hand mr kale you're free to speak hi sir could you state your name please and spell
for the court stenographer my name is gaganvir kahel uh first name is g a g a n v i r last name
kahel k e h a l right do you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the
truth. Yes. Proceed, counsel. Mr. Cahill, did you hear my testimony just now regarding your property
on North 18th? Yes. Did you adopt it as your own? Yes. Is there anything you'd like to add to the
board? No. Okay. Nothing further. Questions from the board? No, chair. Mr. George. Questions or comments
from the virtual audience? Yes, chair. We have Charles Richardson. Good morning, Mr. Richardson.
could you please state your name and spell it for the court stenographer?
Morning, Mr. Chair. Charles Richardson, R-I-C-H-A-R-D-S-O-N, Office of Councilwoman Cindy
Bass, room 508 City Hall. Right. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth,
and nothing but the truth? I do. Proceed, sir. Councilwoman has no opposition to granting
the variance. Thank you. Is there anyone else in the virtual audience?
I see no hands, Chair. Planning Commission. Thank you, Chair.
Ian Hegarty for the Philadelphia City Planning Commission. Board members, in 2021, the zoning map was amended from RM1 to RSA5 on this block. The proposed use, however, is consistent with the physical configuration of the building and with the block, which is predominantly multifamily. The City Planning Commission recommends that the board grant the variance.
Thank you. MI 2022-004-352-3743 North 18th Street. I vote yes with proviso. Interior trash storage.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes with proviso.
James Snell, my vote is yes with proviso.
Mr. Mel Shaheed, my vote is yes with proviso.
Thank you, counsel.
Thank you, board. Have a good day.
Is there anyone in the virtual audience whose 9.30 a.m. case has not been called?
I see no hands, Chair.
Thanks, everyone. See everyone at 2 o'clock.
Bird drive, everyone.
Thank you, Chair.
Thank you.
no I can't hear you Tom that's nothing coming out no no
sorry Tom
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
We're ready to go, Fatina?
Yes, Chair.
We have 40 attendees at this time.
Thank you.
Good afternoon.
My name is Bill Bergman, and I will be chairing this afternoon's ZBA hearing.
With me is our vice chair, Ishmael Shahid.
Present, Mr. Chairman.
Present, Mr. Chairman.
Our board member, Thomas Holloman.
Our board member, Thomas Holliman.
Present, Mr. Chairman.
And our board member, James Snell.
Present, Mr. Chairman.
Also here is our attorney for the day, Ryan McSherry, and also our executive director, Tanya Sunkett.
Here's our virtual format.
Be advised if proceedings are being recorded.
Video will be available by contacting TanyaSunkett at phila.gov.
For the benefit of our court stenographer, we ask attorneys and witnesses to identify themselves before testifying.
If you are participating by phone, you wish to testify, press star 9 to raise your hand and star 6 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 not for comments or testimony.
All comments should be directed to our executive director.
Let's look at this afternoon's schedule.
Number three, MI 2023, 002787, 90 Red Lion Road.
This case has been continued.
And number seven, MI-2022-004-684-9800 Busselton Avenue. This case has been continued. Are there any comments about these two cases or additional cases to be continued?
Good afternoon, Chair. This is Bettina L. I'll be your co-host for this afternoon.
Thank you.
You're welcome.
We have Ms. Isabel Ortiz.
Ma'am, please unmute yourself and wait for the chair.
Hi, could you state your name, please, and spell for the court stenographer?
My name is Isabel, I-S-A-E-E-L-L, Marie, M-A-R-I-E, Ortiz, O-R-T-I-Z.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
I do, Chairman.
What case are you calling about?
9800 Fossilton Avenue, the one that has been continued.
Question.
We will be notified in advance in the future if this is going to be continued.
Quite a few of us that are online now, quite a few.
And we have no information on this case whatsoever.
So here's the issue from what I see.
This case, the CDR has not been completed yet, and that's why they haven't moved forward.
Okay, correct.
But, Chair, may I also ask another question?
It was our understanding, and this is my understanding, that this case was originally brought before the ZBA because they needed a variance.
However, have withdrawn to ask for a variance, and instead-
Excuse me, ma'am, Ms. Ortiz.
This is Bettina Els.
I'm reaching out to you to contact the office.
If you complete the online form when you register for the Zoom hearings, you will receive all notification as to the continuances or anything that's scheduled for the case, okay?
We will make sure you know what's going on, okay?
Thank you.
I see no other hands, Chair.
All right, thank you.
Let's go to our add-on. MI 2023-003-767, 1023-27 West Susquehanna Avenue. The vote on this matter
has been rescheduled by the board to Wednesday, August 30th at 2 p.m. We're going to go to our
regular list, and we're going to start with number five. MI 2023-002-111-6929 Oguns Avenue.
Nakeem Baker is the owner. This application is for use as a multifamily household living,
three dwelling units, and an existing structure. The proposed use multifamily household living
is prohibited in the RSA 5 Zoning District.
There is a letter of support from the 10th Ward Democratic RCO.
Mr. Baker.
Mr. Baker is coming back in as a panelist here.
Thank you.
Mr. Baker?
Hi, Mr. Baker. How are you? Could you state your name and spell, please, for the court stenographer?
Naheem Baker, N-A-H-E-M Baker, B-A-K-E-R.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
our vice chair has just a few questions for you sir
okay good afternoon sir 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 all right thank you
can you you can proceed and share your screen
green button says that's it okay it's coming should be coming up
i don't see your documents mr baker
oh i wasn't sure if you see my screen
my documents should be pulling up okay
Okay. Tell us what you're trying to do, Mr. Baker.
Yeah, how you doing, Mr. Baker? I'm here because I'm applying for a three-family dwelling for an existing structure.
um when i purchased the property it was uh already set up for three three um family units
uh three three two bedroom units it was already set up um and it's in this uh i guess presentation
i'll be going over my refusal letter my application appeal uh project and project information form i
got a copy of my d text compliance photos of the orange poster board interior and exterior photos
documentation of the meeting, and a letter of support from the RCO.
Okay. Proceed.
Okay. Like I said, this is my refusal letter. I was applying for a three-family dwelling. As you
can see, this property was granted a variance for a three-family dwelling as early as April of 2013.
At some point between April 2013 and me purchasing a property, the zoning was a drop down to our RSA five, which is single family.
And I'm here in hopes of getting granted a variance to bring it back to a three family dwelling.
OK. Just to give you an idea of the block and just the character of the block.
These are the surrounding corner properties of my property.
This is to the left is Ogontz and Georgian Road, which is the home directly across the street from
our property. As you can see, it's multifamily. And then on the right is Ogontz and Andrews Ave,
which is the next light up. And in this next slide, you can see the homes to the south of
of my property um the next corner property is also multi-family use just to give you idea of
the block that uh that the property is on okay here's my application of a for appeal um copy of
the deed um here's um a photo of philadelphia.gov tax services just to show update up-to-date property
texas okay um here's a photo of the uh orange poster board um on the front
on the front page is uh the front is oh god's avenue
i'm sorry i'm sorry um on the front you can see um
On the front, Ogontae Avenue is the front of the property.
On to the right of you is the side, Georgian Road, the side of the property.
My apologies, that's my George.
She's sick.
This is exterior photos.
This is the front.
On to the left of you, Ogontae Avenue.
To the right is Georgian Road.
Here are some interior photos of the property. Each unit is already set up, live room, kitchen, bathroom. To the left is the entrance to the first unit.
here are some interior photos of the property. Each unit is already set up.
Then the second unit, live room, kitchen, bathroom, already set up the way I purchased the property.
Then the third unit also, live room, kitchen, and bathroom, all set up for third unit.
Then my next slide shows that the utilities are already separated. To the left is the gas meters, and right there in the center is the electric meters, and then to the right is three water heaters for each unit.
here's a letter that i sent out to the neighbors for the community meeting
and then my next slide is a summary of the meeting um it was 22 in attendance i got a 17
uh vote four five oppose and then to the right is a letter of a letter of approval from a letter of
support from the RCO with some provisos provisos being that I update I put a
lighting on the since it's a corner property cameras a trash plant and a
landscaping plant and acquiring a property manager okay and then following
the meeting I put up I put up some lighting to the left you can see it's a
camera facing the entire sidewalk and in the light right on top of it and then
And it's still on the side.
The garage is at the end of the property, still on the sidewalk, just lighting up that sidewalk for neighbors.
And then trash plans, as you can see, I added three trash cans to the platform outside the house,
two recycling bins with room to add more if needed.
And then as far as landscaping, I've hired a local landscaper in the area.
to just add me to his routine
of houses that he serviced.
that's
the end of my presentation.
Thank you. Thank you. Questions from
the board? No, Chair.
No, Chair.
No, Mr. Chairman.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
I see no handshare.
Planning Commissioner.
This is Ron Bednar, City Planning, first name Ron, R-O-N, last name Bednar, B-E-D-N-A-R.
Do you swear or affirm, tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
Proceed, sir.
This property is indicated for residential use on the City Plan.
Given the physical circumstances of the site, we have no objection to the granting and the variance.
Thank you.
MI 2023-002-111-6929-O Guns Avenue, I vote yes.
Thomas Solomon, my vote is yes.
James Snell, my vote is yes.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes.
Thank you, sir.
You have your votes.
Number nine.
MI 2023 002049 787 North 38th Street. Robert Careless is the attorney for the developer.
Recommendation of support from Mantua Civic Association.
Project strongly supported by Councilmember Gauthier, applicant provided a petition in support from 166 neighbors, received waiver from the Department of Planning and Development, as well as the authorization letter from Affiliate of Redevelopment Authorities.
Mr. Careless.
Mr. Careless, could you please raise your virtual hand?
do we see him i see a hand just went up here i have a hand underneath tom wood i'll allow them
to speak before i promote them chair okay thank you you're welcome
Mr. Witt, please unmute yourself and wait for the chair.
Mr. Witt?
Yes, yes.
Could you state your name, please, and spell for the court stenographer?
Could you state your name, please, and spell for the courts?
Thomas Witt, W-I-T-T, of the firm Cozen O'Connor, 1650 Market Street.
All right.
Do you swear a firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
You're representing this client today?
I'm a colleague of Mr. Karras.
Are we going to promote him now?
Yes, sir.
Thank you.
He's coming back in now.
Hi, Mr. Witt. How are you, sir?
Fine. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Could you identify your client and the relationship to the property?
Yes, I am Tom Witt of Cozen O'Connor.
As I said, we represent Women's Community Revitalization Program, the equitable owner of the property.
I'm sorry, Women's Community Revitalization Project, a nonprofit, and its affiliated land
trust, Community Justice Land Trust, which will develop this property.
Okay. Our vice chair has just a few questions for you, sir.
Certainly.
Good afternoon, Counselor. Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its
accuracy?
We 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?
We have.
Thank you.
Please proceed and share your screen.
Thank you.
Is that shared now?
Is that seeing?
It is.
That's fine.
So you're looking at a color rendering.
So we represent Women's Community Revitalization Program.
We have a project.
We have two witnesses who will testify and three others who are available in the event that there are any questions.
What is proposed here is a 32-unit multifamily building for very low-income people, and we have a number of variances that result from unique circumstances related to this property.
Let me just run through very quickly for you the variances in question and why each of them is justified.
We have a variance on height because we're four stories instead of three.
the testimony will show that the economics of these developments are such that we could not
go forward with this program without approximately the 32 units that we have proposed
and that fourth floor is nine of those units that would reduce us to 23 the choice is not between
23 uh and it's not that we could do 23 it's either something close to 32 or nothing that
we can do on this site because of the way the economics work so the height variance the
dimensional variance necessary because of the economic realities of making this kind of
development possible with respect to the 38th street front yard setback
to show you the site plan we are on brown street we cover the entire almost the entire frontage
on brown street we do not leave a setback at the corner on 38th we'll have a slight one but not
much of one and we have none at all on the corner on 38th street this is a glitch in the code a
funny provision that treats those as front yard setbacks even though the front is really brown
street and that's where our front door will be we submit that to literally comply with the code and
pull those those walls back would create orphaned pieces that aren't properly supervised whereas
here we have a design that's complete and pleasing and fits the street provides eyes on the street
and is the best result and it's a good example of why we need a board of adjustment to look at the
fine points of where things are and pick up these situations where a literal interpretation of the
code produces a hardship. Similarly, on the DeKalb, and let me just take you to a photograph
to show you how that, well, no, I'll do that later. If you go to the DeKalb Street frontage,
it's the same issue, that this is our front on Brown Street. It is technically a front on DeKalb,
but it ought to set back. But were it to set back, it would leave the corner really unpatrolled and
orphaned in a way that wouldn't be suitable also notice that on 38th street side after it fills
the corner the building then does have a setback for some landscaping which improves the quality
of our windows looking out and also respects the porch line of the properties that are south of us
you can see that on the building south of us uh i'm pointing my cursor now
Now, as to, excuse me, the rear lot line, the proposal does provide on the DeKalb Street side.
And the proposal does provide on the DeKalb Street side a substantial setback of the building. It's almost 50 feet from the lot line to the building on the DeKalb Street side. We're using that for parking because we wanted to have a few parking spaces.
And so it doesn't count as rear yard, but it does separate the building from the side, the party wall of the DeKalb Street buildings to the south of us.
We also have in that area some landscaping.
And where we're closest to our neighbors is on the 38th Street side.
And on the other side of our property line there, there's a vacant lot that's 15 feet wide.
But the next property south has a blank party wall facing that area.
and presumably if the 15 foot wide lot intervening were ever developed it would be developed in the
same way with a party wall on the north side and that would therefore make it really not essential
that we have any further setback here and again the design team is trying to make sure they get
enough units in here to make this work or we'll have no units rather than having a smaller number
this photograph will illustrate the point we're standing on 38th street
This photograph is from our exhibit package, A8, page one, and I'm sorry, A9.
And you're standing on 38th Street looking east towards DeKalb.
Brown Street is visible on the left side.
And on the right side, you can see that party wall that I was talking about that is the
north wall of the building south of us.
There is another lot 15 feet between that building and our property line.
Then turning to the use variance, we are proposing multifamily as the immediate past applicant was as well.
We are proposing multifamily in a district that is single family.
And we have two points to make.
First, we disagree with the code on the distinction between single family and multifamily being a use distinction.
We don't disagree with the refusal. The refusal is right. We think the code is wrong.
Every one of our 32 dwelling units will be occupied by one family.
And in our view, the only difference between that and a single family home is the number of them.
It's not the use. The use is the same one family in each dwelling unit.
And it's our view that that's incorrectly described as a used variance.
And here, the number of units that we need in order to make it work and have any units at all justifies the variance.
But we also recognize that we're a little bit ahead of our skis on that.
The rest of the world hasn't caught up to the wisdom of our position on that.
And if you even take the traditional variance analysis based on hardship unique to the property, we believe there is indeed an unnecessary hardship unique to the property.
And you find it in the first four of our exhibits, which are letters from the Philadelphia Housing Development Corporation, the Philadelphia Redevelopment Authority, the Pennsylvania Housing Finance Agency, and the Philadelphia City Planning Commission.
take the amount of public effort that has been put into this to try to develop these apartments
for low-income families, combine that with the private charitable resources of women's
community revitalization project, which have been put into it, and to not take advantage of that
over a provision of the zoning code, would we believe constitute waste. To let that resource
lapse and not take advantage of it would constitute waste. The common law judges from the earliest
times have hated waste because it makes everybody poorer. And so in our view, for the benefit of
all of our community, we need to take advantage of this opportunity to raise up a few families,
32 families into very good, safe, stable, affordable housing. With that, I'd like to call
my two witnesses. The first is Nora Liktash, Executive Director of Women's Community
Revitalization Project. Nora Liktash, you're available to speak. Please wait for the chair.
Hi, could you state your name, please, and spell for the court stenographer?
Sure. My name is Nora, N-O-R-A, Liktash, L-I-C-H-T-A-S-H.
Do you swear or affirm, tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Proceed, counsel.
Nora, did you hear my testimony and presentation?
I did.
And as to the factual matters that I stated, would you accept them and adopt them as your own testimony?
I do accept them and adopt them as my own testimony.
And I believe you have some words for the board.
Yeah, I'd like to tell you a little bit about the Women's Community Revitalization Project, or I Work, which is also known as WCRP, for sure.
Yeah, I'd like to tell you a little bit about the Women's Community Revitalization Project.
And WCRP is a nonprofit, women-led community development corporation committed to social and economic equity for low-income families.
We not only develop affordable homes, we provide supportive services and resources for the families that live in our properties.
It's clear to us that obtaining an affordable home can be a critical step in improving health, well-being, and financial security for families.
On average, tenants increase their income by approximately 60% over the first four years of living in WCRP's homes.
And that's because they have an affordable house and they can move forward.
WCRP has built or rehabbed more than 350 homes over the last 35 years in Philadelphia.
And recent approvals before this board include the Arlene Thorpe townhomes and Grays Ferry.
and Linda Lockman King Apartments in Haddington, Philadelphia, developments that produce access to
affordable housing in neighborhoods like Mantua in this one where we're seeing property values
on the rise and low-income residents at risk of being pushed out of their own neighborhoods.
your next witness sir uh our next witness is darren edwards principal of cicada architecture
and planning inc darren edwards darren edwards you're allowed to speak please i'm sure could
Would you state your name, please, and spell for the court stenographer?
Darren Edwards, D-A-R-Y-N-E-D-W-A-R-D-S.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Proceed, Mr. Witt.
Mr. Edwards, did you hear my opening statement, and do you agree with it, and adopt it as your own testimony?
And do you have anything to add on the design that you've created here?
I think the only thing that I would add is that parking was not required, but in meeting with the neighbors, there was a request for that, and we incorporated that into the design.
That concludes our presentation, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you.
Questions from the board?
No, Chair.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
here we have dante mossy okay
please unmute yourself sir and wait for the chair hi could you state your name please
spell for the court stenographer dante mossy e-a-n-t-e mossy m-o-s-s-i right do you swear
or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth yes proceed sir
um i i live in a i live and own the property at 808 north 38th street
um and i know someone out the madura built over a year ago and i signed in uh support of this
right um but i actually want to do the opposite right now i'm not in support of this being built
on 38th and brown i think there's too many units too many people in this small area
and I have a concern of
violence with an area that already has violence
with other neighborhoods moving into this neighborhood.
And then also, yeah, I mean, that's the gist of everything.
All right, Mr. Massey, we appreciate your call
and we'll take what you said into consideration.
Is there anyone else in the virtual audience?
Yes, Chair, we have Dwayne Drummond.
Hi, Mr. Drummond.
Could you state your name, please, and spell for the court stenographer?
Yes, my name is Dwayne Drummond.
It's D-E-W-A-Y-N-E-D-R-U-M-M-O-N-D.
Right.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
I do, so help me God.
Are you a neighbor?
All right, proceed.
So my name is Dwayne Drummond. I lived in the West Philadelphia section of Mantua for my whole entire life for 43 years.
I am currently the 24th war leader and have been involved in taking leadership in a number of neighborhood organizations in Mantua.
The affordable housing development that is planned by Women's Community Vitalization Project for this vacant land at 38th and Brownstreet is something that the neighborhood has needed, especially now.
Many people from this area truly need affordable housing.
For too many years, I have seen this lot and others sit vacant, which bring problems such as trench, raccoon, possums.
which bring problems such as trash, raccoon, possums, and high crime activity.
When I learned that this will be put to good use by a group promising to help low-income families, I was relieved.
So many lots have been gotten by developers looking to charge market rents and make a huge profit.
it. I support this event. I support this project wholeheartedly, and I look forward to its
completion. Thank you, Chairman. Thank you, Mr. Drummond. Thank you for taking the time to call
in. We appreciate your comments. For anyone else in the virtual audience? Yes, Chair. We have,
looks like we have Andrew Goodman. Hi, Mr. Goodman. You've already been sworn in today.
just state your name, please. Andrew Goodman, representing third district council member,
Jamie Gaudier. Proceed, Mr. Goodman. Thank you. Good afternoon, Mr. Chair and members of the
board. Council member Gaudier strongly supports this application and would ask that you vote yes
this afternoon. We cannot overstate how important and unique this project is to the Manchewa
community and to West Philadelphia overall. I won't duplicate what Mr. Drummond effectively
described about the importance of affordable housing. I will say that there truly is no
housing more affordable that's getting constructed these days than the type of housing and the type
of model that WCRP provides. They did, per that, received an incredibly competitive award of low
income housing tax credits from the state for this site. And missing the opportunity to put
that award to use doesn't just lose affordable housing for 38th Street or for Mantua or for
West Philadelphia. The city loses that award entirely and never gets it back. And with the
housing crisis that we're in, we cannot afford for that to happen. And I would also direct the
board to comparable variances that it granted just across the street on the north side of Brown
Street for another affordable housing that received the same tax credit award. So thank you for the
opportunity to testify this afternoon. Thank you, Mr. Goodman, for all of your testimony today. We
appreciate it. Is there anyone else in the virtual audience? Yes, Chair, we have Michael Thorpe.
Okay. Hello, Chair. How are you? You've already been sworn today, sir, just state your name for
the record. Yes, my name is Michael Thorpe, M-I-C-H-A-E-L, T-H-O-R-P-E. I am the Executive
director of the Mount Vernon Manor CDC. And we support this affordable housing development at the
corner of 38th and Brown Street wholeheartedly, as it has been described by Andrew and our
Mantua Civic Association president that I've lived in this neighborhood, I'm 59 years old,
I've walked past these abandoned lots and the short dumping, the trash, and just to have an
opportunity where our neighborhood is just under a great deal of pressure with market rate housing
that people are being forced out. So sorry for talking so much, but I support this project
one million percent. And Mount Vernon Manor has been in the business of developing affordable
housing for 50 years. And thank you to WCRP for helping to develop units like these in our
neighborhood. Thank you. Thank you for all your testimony today. We appreciate it. Is there anyone
else? I see no hands, Chair. Planning Commission. This is Ron Bednar, City Planning. Property is
indicated for residential use on the city plan. We recommend that the requested variance be granted.
Thank you. MI 2023-002-049-787-North 38th Street, I vote yes.
James Snell, my vote is yes.
Mr. Shahid, my vote is yes.
Council, you have your votes.
Thank you very much.
Thank you.
Number one, MI 2023-001-979, 1801-03 North Howard Street.
Rebecca Cole is the attorney.
Letter of support from the South Kennington Community Partners.
Rebecca Cole is coming back in as a panelist.
Thank you.
Hi, counsel. How are you? Could you state your name, please, and spell for the court
sonographer? Hi, good afternoon. My name is Rebecca Cole, R-E-B-E-C.
Hi, good afternoon. My name is Rebecca Cole, R-E-B-E-C-C-A-C-O-L-E, here on behalf of our client.
Okay, do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
And your client is 1801 North Howard, LLC?
1801 North Howard Street, LLC. And the client, Justin Messberg, is here on behalf of the LLC, along with our project architect.
Okay, our vice chair has just a few questions for you.
Good afternoon, counsel. Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stick your lead to its accuracy?
Have you emailed in all the required documents and exhibits that are needed and required to proceed with this case, file these in advance of this hearing?
I have.
Thank you. Please proceed and share your screen.
Thank you.
Okay. Can everyone see my screen?
We can.
Thank you.
Our presentation today will be about 1801 to 03 North Howard Street.
We represent 1801 North Howard Street, LLC.
Again, the client and project architect are here with us.
Included in our exhibit packet is the refusal, aerial and zoning maps, notice of appeal,
project information form, plans and site photos, RCO notice and letter, as well as posting photos,
deed and tax clearance certificate. We received just one refusal. We are here seeking a single
de minimis dimensional variance from the code's maximum occupied area requirements in order to
add a one-story elevator lobby in the interior courtyard of an existing building in order to
allow ADA access to the elevator and building. The proposed elevator lobby will not be visible
from the street and currently the building and elevator are not ADA accessible. The owner is
redeveloping this property for residential and commercial use under separate previously approved
permits and the project was well received by the community who voted in unanimous support of the
variance request and an RCO meeting on June 28th of this year. The letter of support is attached
to our packet. I'd like to start by giving some context. Here's a image of the property highlighted
in yellow here where my pointer is in the midst of a scene of South Kensington. As you can see,
it's a large well-preserved historic building located in South Kensington. Here's a closer look
of it from above it's about an 1100 square foot lot bounded by west montgomery on the south uh
north hope street on the east and north howard street on the west this area is well developed
already including a mix of zoning districts and the current zoning for this property here on the
zoning map you'll see in blue we're in an irmx block we're down at the bottom and there are a
number of varied uses around the area. A larger scope of the zoning map shows you just how wide
ranging the uses in that area are. This project, the proposed nine foot by seven foot elevator
lobby addition, tiny small square, will be added into the attached to the primary four-story brick
building at this property that's here on the side of north howard street and west montgomery
it will be accessed through the interior courtyard where there is already a curb cut
and again will not be visible from the street the prior uses will continue including residential
and commercial and i want to emphasize that this is a prior non-conformity that exists on the lot
for maximum occupied area. We have 80% permitted by code on this property, which would be about
8,800 square feet. And the existing lot coverage is 84.8% or 9,400 square feet roughly. We are
proposing 85.3% maximum occupied area, which is only an additional 0.5% increase in total occupied
area overall this represents roughly 65 square feet for the elevator lobby addition
I'm going to get to a few more site photos again here's our appeal for application project
information form I'll get back to the plans but I'd like to show you the building itself
just for scale here it is on Howard Street you can see there's no entrance on the side
And again, another view down Howard Street for scale, up West Montgomery Street, here is that courtyard access that we'll have and the existing curb cut, another view on Montgomery with the courtyard access.
Another view on Montgomery with the courtyard access, which is currently gated up.
A view down Hope Street on the corner of Montgomery and further down Hope Street.
Just going back to our plans, you can see we have the erection of a single story addition is all that we're asking for here.
It's attached to an existing structure.
This image in the bottom right-hand corner of the plans
shows the existing building, existing elevator shaft,
and just about what this proposed elevator access
would look like, about not even 12 feet tall,
nine by seven feet in footprint.
And again, here you can see the larger site plan
on the right-hand side shows the existing
four-story building along here on North Howard
and the corner where the existing building and elevator shaft are, and this small white square
here where this arrow points is all that we will be adding in occupied area. That is all that is
needed to allow an elevator lobby to allow ADA access for this building and elevator together.
And again, the fact that this addition was so de minimis and was also required for ADA access to
building were reasons why the RCO supported our variance request. So again, we have a single
dimensional refusal. But we did receive, again, the maximum occupied area is only 80% permitted,
and we have proposed 85.3. However, the excess lot coverage being an existing condition at this
large building, we are seeking variance relief. And we believe applicant has met all the criteria
for a grant of variance under 14303AE of the code. Denial of variance would result in an
unnecessary hardship to the applicant as this minor addition is necessary for ADA access to
the elevator and building. This hardship was not created by the applicant as it is a pre-existing
condition exceeding maximum occupied area at the property, and they're only proposing 0.5% increase
in overall occupied area. Granting this variance will be in harmony with the code's purpose and
spirit and will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare. In fact, we believe
the public benefits from ADA accessibility and promoting compliance with ADA requirements
throughout the city um again i'd just like to point out we have the rco's full support
and we believe the applicant has demonstrated a hardship which requires a grant of a dimensional
variance um my client is also here to adopt my testimony if uh why don't you bring your client on
justin would you raise your hand please
Justin, last name, begin it, and M, you're free of T.
Last name, Meshberg.
Sure, do me a favor.
Could you state your name and then spell for the course sonographer?
My name is Justin Meshberg.
First name, Justin, J-U-S-T-I-N.
Last name, Meshberg, M-E-S-H-B-E-R-G.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Proceed, counsel.
Hi, Justin.
Have you heard my testimony and presentation?
Yes, I have.
And do you agree it's true to your best of your belief and knowledge?
And would you adopt this testimony as your own?
Thank you.
Questions from the board?
No, Chair.
no chair Tom okay questions or comments from the virtual audience
excuse me chair Mr Holloman he has his hand up okay good great thank you
Ms. Holloman, yes. Can you hear me?
We can, Tom. What's your vote?
Okay, we have enough people so far. Anyone else in the virtual audience?
I see no handshare.
Planning Commission.
uh ron bednar city planning property is currently indicated for industrial residential mixed use on
Property is currently indicated for industrial residential mixed use on a city plan.
the city
With the pre-existing dimensional hardship of the property, we recommend that the question
M.I. 2023-001-978-1801-203, North Howard Street, I vote yes.
Thomas Holliman, I vote yes.
James Snell, my vote is yes.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes.
Thank you, counsel.
Thank you, all.
Number two, MI 2023-002-008-2501 Oakford Street. Henry Clinton is the attorney. There's a letter of support from the residents organized for advocacy and direction and a letter of support from Councilman Johnson.
Mr. Clinton is coming back in as a panelist.
Okay, thank you.
Mr. Clinton, could you state your name, please, and spell for the court stenographer?
You are Henry Clinton, H-E-N-R-Y, Clinton, C-L-I-N-T-O-N.
Right.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Could you identify your client and relationship to this property?
The client is 25th and Oakford, LLC, and his representative is here on the call with me,
Matt Ryan, R-Y-A-N.
Our vice chair has just a few questions for you, sir.
good afternoon counsel do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its
accuracy i do i've 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 i have thank you
counsel please proceed thank you mr shee
Henry. Is that visible, Mr. Chairman? We see the front. We don't see any of your.
We're screen sharing.
okay you're up now sir thank you uh good afternoon mr chairman members of the board
again i'm here henry clinton on behalf of 25th and oakford llc matthew ryan is with me uh this
is the presentation for this afternoon uh this is my table of contents containing exhibits a1
through a10 which i asked be admitted into evidence uh by way of background this is an i2
industrial zone. Historically, an industrial use was here back in the day. It was a location for
making men's suits. Thus, the aptly named project is the Herringbone Lofts. This is the refusal,
and you can see down at the bottom here, notes to the ZBA. The client was before the board back in
2018. This was an existing four-story structure in 2018. The request for an additional story
making it a five-story building was approved for use as 54 apartments. We're here today to ask for
a variety of uses in the basement. It's really a lower level and I'll show you numerous photographs.
It's more like an English basement. There's light and air that comes into that first floor area, and the request is for a wide variety of uses because we've had difficulty in renting that space, and we were looking for uses that would complement not only the residents in the building, but also the neighborhood.
In fact, we met with the neighborhood RUDE. That's the acronym for the RCO. We met with them on several occasions, and they basically eliminated uses that they did not want.
So the uses that we're asking the board for today are uses that the community group supports because they believe, like I do and the client, that any of the uses that we have applied for retail sales, solo medical, dental, health practitioner, personal services, educational facilities, perhaps a child care center, a commissary, catering, restaurants, retail use of consumer goods.
even a library or an exhibit area for cultural events, the neighborhood group believes that
that would add to the neighborhood, and we believe would also add to the residents in
the building. Here's the letter of support from Rode, letter of support from Councilman
Johnson, and we also have an expert in the commercial leasing arena.
And we also have an expert in the commercial leasing arena to testify today if the chairman so wishes. And basically, in a nutshell, the realtor from MPN Realty will testify, and I'll just read one or two lines, Mr. Chairman, from the letter rather than read the entire letter.
But basically, starting from the next to last paragraph, the more expansive the permitted commercial uses, the more appealing the space becomes for a variety of potential tenants.
More opportunity for use typically translates into more showings and fewer vacancies.
Having this space occupied will brighten the ground level, liven the sidewalks and streetscape surrounding it, draw more foot traffic to the area, and benefit the neighborhood and the building.
So we've had tenants through the building, but typically for storage.
And no one wants storage in this lower level, and you'll see why when I show you the photographs of the building.
So this is the ground floor, and we're looking west on Oakford Street, and the lower level is where my cursor is.
This is the aerial photograph of the building.
It was a four-story building.
The fifth story was added between 2018 and 2022.
We're right west of the trestle, which runs from, you know, down Oregon Avenue, down to and through West Philadelphia and into North Philadelphia.
On the right-hand side of the trestle is Point Breeze.
On the left-hand side is Grace Ferry Avenue.
Excuse me, it's Grace Ferry.
To the north of our building is an industrial small warehouse that a contractor uses to fabricate cabinets and other materials.
But you can see the majority of the area within a circle or radius of the building is residential.
So I think that's why the board looked kindly on the application in 2018 to convert this building, which had been vacant for a minimum of 20 years, from an industrial use into a residential use.
This is a ground-level shot of the building with the fifth story, four stories, all new windows.
Everything has been completely renovated with 54 apartments.
And then here's the ground level.
The entrance to the ground level will be off of 25th Street in the rear. This is the rear entrance to the basement level. Again, some interior photographs. It's really not usable for residential. That's why we're trying to adapt it for some tenant.
And the reason we're asking this again, Mr. Chairman, is when a tenant comes in to look at the space, say they want to make it into an educational facility, they would have to wait the six to eight months, which is typical to get the zoning approval.
So we're trying to have a variety of uses so we can have this space occupied and activated for the neighbors and for the neighborhood.
This is a photograph looking south, and you can see MPN sign out on the rear of the building.
Again, looking for tenants as much as possible. This is a view looking west from 25th Street.
Some more interior photographs just to give the board a flavor of what the space looks like and what we're trying to do.
and these are the plans that exist now for the lower level the entrance is right here
to the right where my cursor is is a trash room in the rear of the space is a number of uses
bicycle racks, some storage. There's a pico vault. There's a pump room and other uses for
utilities. The space that we're asking to be used for multiple uses is this gray shaded area. It's
about 6,000 square feet. The rest of the documents are the pro forma documents you would see in an
application like this. Here's a zoning map indicating, you know, I2 use in this area
surrounded by RM1. Again, the use of the building is residential, and we think the accessory use in
the basement lower level will be helpful for the residential use of that building and the
surrounding neighbors. So I do have the realtor on the call, Mr. Chairman, if you would like to
hear her testimony, which will be a recapsulation of the letter of support from MPN.
Mr. Clinton, I think we understand where it is.
Okay, where it is. And I think you explained it pretty well. So just if any of the board members would want to hear from her, they can mention it when I call them.
And I think you explained it pretty well.
So just if any of the board members.
Okay. So just briefly, Mr. Chairman, in conclusion, we believe that the activation of the basement for the multitude of uses that we're suggesting will be is an economic necessity for the viable use of the space, which has remained vacant and unleasable.
We're not altering the character of the neighborhood. We're not affecting any development adjacent, not affecting any adjacent property owners, light or air. It's in harmony with the code, we believe. And it's in harmony, certainly, with what the neighborhood wants and the councilman. And with that, we can ask my client to unmute himself, Mr. Chairman.
Absolutely.
Mr. Ryan, can you unmute yourself, please?
please Matthew Ryan you're free to speak hi Mr Ryan could you state your name please
spell for the court stenographer Matthew Ryan M-A-T-T-H-E-W-R-Y-A-N do you swear or affirm
to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth yes proceed counsel uh good afternoon
Mr. Ryan, were you on the call when I presented the project for the LLC?
And if you had the opportunity to testify, would you adopt my testimony as your own
and it being true and correct?
Thank you, Mr. Ryan.
All right.
Questions from the board?
No, Chair.
No, Mr. Jeremy.
No, Chair.
All right.
Thank you.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
i see no hands chair planning commission uh ron bednor city planning while this property is
currently indicated for industrial and the city plan you have no objection to the granting of
the proposed adaptive use variance thank you mi 2023 002 008 2501 oakford street i vote yes
James Snell, I vote yes
Thomas Howellman, I vote yes
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes
Thank you, thank you, counsel
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, members of the board
Number four, MI 2023-002-084-2136 North Uber Street
Alan Nockamson is the attorney
There's a letter of support from the 32nd Ward RCO with proviso and a letter of opposition from Strawberry Mansion Community Concern.
Alan Nockmson is coming back in as a panelist.
Thank you.
Hi, Mr. Nockmson, could you state your name, please, and spell for the court stenographer?
Yes, Alan, A-L-A-N, last name Nockerson, N-O-C-H-U-M-S-O-N.
Right. Do you swear or firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Could you identify your client, the relationship to the property?
Yes, my client is YJCLLC. In the virtual audience is Yulari Jean Charles, its member.
Okay. Our vice chair has just a few questions.
good afternoon council do you agree to weigh the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its
accuracy i do have you emailed all that have you emailed all the required documents and exhibits
that are needed to proceed with this case obvious in advance of this hearing yes we have thanks
council. Please proceed and share your screen. All right. So I'm here to present 2136 North
Uber Street. What we're looking to do is put now a four-unit dwelling on this property. Just as a
matter of background, it's not uncommon to have multi-family on this block. And the 2035 plan
actually calls for this to be an RM1 property, which we'll have before you this year.
We're going to review the notice of refusal. The correspondence from the 32nd Democratic Ward.
Could you speak up just a little bit? You're a little closer, maybe. Thank you, sir.
Yeah. So first, we're going to review the notice of refusal, then the correspondence from the 32nd
Democratic Ward, the coordinating RCO for this matter. My understanding is that Strawberry
Ray Manchin Community Concern also submitted a letter, this time in opposition, but again,
we met with the community and they were in support of this project.
Then we're going to look at the 2100 block of North Uber Street, nearby RSA 5 properties that are also multifamily, similar in nature to ours.
Then we're going to look at the 2100 block of North Uber Street nearby RSA.
We're going to look at the nearby side yard variances.
We purposefully have a side yard similar to the one that's adjacent to us, which is showing that this is not uncommon what we're requesting.
also by having the side yards we're allowed to put store the garbage in the rear yard which is
also a proviso we're willing to agree to and then we have maps of the area again the philadelphia
2035 plan calls for this to be an rm1 property especially given its class its location in
neighborhood which is multifamily in nature then photographs of the property in the surrounding
area, our plans and drawings, our RCO meeting notice along with proof of mailing that notice,
our application for appeal, our deed to the property showing that YJC LLC is the owner of
the property, and our Certificate of Tax Clearance. At the conclusion of my presentation, I will ask
Ms. John Charles to virtually raise her hand, be sworn in, and then I'll have a few questions for
her regarding my presentation. So first things first, this is an RSA 5 property, and we're asking
to do two things. Originally, we asked for five units. Looking at the situation more closely,
especially given the 2035 plan and given the inclination of the community to support this
project with only four units, we are asking the zoning board to grant our variance with a proviso
so maximum four units. Again, the first refusal is a use refusal, and then the second refusal
has to do with the side yard, where five feet of side yard is required under the code,
where we're asking for a side yard of two and a half feet. But as you can see from what we'll see
from the presentation, is that there's already an existing side yard of two and a half feet for a
neighboring property. That gives a total of five feet, which meets the spirit of the code. Also,
it's not out of character of what we're asking for because our nearby neighbor has the same thing.
So we received correspondence from the 32nd Democratic Ward after our meeting,
and these are the things they asked, and they support the project. And this is the things they
asked of us. Reduce the unit count to four, which we have no objection, and we would ask in terms of
proviso. They asked for a sanitation plan. My notes from the meeting are as follows. It would
say trash stored in the rear, and then commercial trash pickup. So if the board feels so inclined
to grant our variance request, those are the two other provisos in addition to maximum four units,
commercial trash pickup, as well as trash stored in the rear. And then they talked about tree
planting, which is not an enforceable proviso, but we would be obviously in agreement to work
with the Fairmont Park Commission in trying to get a tree in front of our house. And then the
opposition letter from the Strawberry Community Concern Group, again, not the coordinating RCO,
did provide a letter in opposition. They stated there was an excessive amount of multi-family
units requested, which is not the case, because when we met with the community, they were in
support of having four units. And again, really, there was nothing that was zoning related other
than the demonstrated hardship. Here, due to economic factors such as rising interest rates,
cost of construction, and, you know, general requests from the community in terms of affordability
of units, we think that this is an appropriate project under the spirit of the Philadelphia
zoning code. Now, in terms of what our neighboring properties are doing, there are a multitude of
properties in the 2100 block of North Uber Street, which are also RSA 5 zoning classification,
which also have multifamily use. So, 2120 North Uber Street, 2122 North Uber Street,
2128 North Uber Street, 2138 North Uber Street, 2158 North Uber Street. All are RSA 5 properties,
all in our block, and all are also multifamily in nature. And then in terms of nearby side yard
variances, we have a number of properties here of 2140 and 2138 North Uber Street, which also
requested a variance for side yards.
2126 North Uber Street as well
requested and obtained a variance
for a side yard.
And then maps of the area.
And then maps of the area. As you can see, there's a mix of zoning classifications even now in this in this area, where if we were across the street, this will be allowed as a right to this project.
As you can see, there's a mix of
Thank you.
and then the 2035 plan shows that uh that our section right here it would be designated as rm1
um upon the enactment of the recommendations of the city planning commission regarding this
property and then photographs of their property uh again you can even see here this is the you
You know, our neighboring property is multifamily, but this is our this is their side yard of two and a half feet.
And we're going to match it based on our proposal.
Here's a map. Excuse me. Here's a photograph of the posting for today's hearing.
And then this is North Uber Street to the right of the property, to the left of the property.
And then here are plans and drawings of how we're mimicking the other property to the right of us.
again, we're mimicking the side yard, which is a variance. We're matching the cornice line and
the overall design of the property in terms of how the windows are situated, lintels, brick facades,
even the stone structure on the bottom part of our building. This is the rear of our property.
And then you can see our side yard matches the side yard to the right of us.
And then in terms of the floor plan, it's pretty straightforward. You come out to a general common hallway. You have unit number one, which is one bedroom, one bath. You have unit two in the rear, which is a two bedroom, one bath.
And then you have two bi-level units, you know, for, well, yes, you have two bi-level units, one here on the second and third floors, and then another one on the fourth floor, the third floor, excuse me.
and then we met with the community on July 31st at 6 p.m. We had 137 addresses were notified of
our meeting, listed the addresses, proof of mailing to those addresses, our application
for appeal that we filed on behalf of YJC LLC, notice of refusal that was submitted with the
application for appeal along with the project information form, our deed to the property
showing that YJCLLC is the owner of the property, and our Certificate of Tax Clearance showing that
my client's in good standing. With that being said, I would ask that Yolanda virtually raise
her hands and be sworn in. Could you state your name, please, and spell for the court sonographer?
My name is Yolari Jean Charles, first name Y-O-L-A-U-R-E, last name Jean, J-E-A-N hyphen Charles, C-H-A-R-L-E-S.
You swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Proceed, counsel.
Yes, Yolari, you heard everything I had to say today about your zoning matter.
Is it true and correct?
Do you adopt as your own testimony?
Thank you.
Thank you.
Questions from the board?
No, Chair.
No, Mr. Chairman.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
No hands, Chair.
Planning Commission.
I'm sorry.
Strawberry Mansion Community Concern, just put the hand up.
Thank you.
You're welcome.
Please unmute yourself.
strawberry mansion can you hear me hi could you state your name please and spell for the
court's stenographer can you hear me yes we can okay hi my name is going to be the coming
director strawberry mansion community concern it's b's and boy oh excuse me i'll take care of it
do me a favor do it one more time please we're having a hard time hearing you
is bonita can you hear me go ahead state your name again bonita cummings right spell it please
for the court sonographer b-o-n-i-t-a cummings c-u-m-m-i-n-g-s do you swear or affirm to tell
the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth i do proceed ms cummings
I just wanted to indicate that we did meet IMA affected RSEO, and there was no agreement.
There was consideration of looking at the impact of reducing the units to four.
the units to four. However, when you look at the design, the egress well gives you access to the
However, when you look at the design,
basement, which you still end up with five units because they ultimately, we're finding, use these
units, these basement units as apartments. It's very excessive in the number of units for what
would be normally a single family property so we uh the the narrowing of the um side yard
makes it impossible to bring the trash out to the street the block has uh properties that mimic that
where all the trash cans are out in front of the pavement because they can't move through those
narrow side yard so that uh number of units is too many there should be no egress well and this uh
place is a major hardship of density on that block it's already a lot of properties there
he indicated may have multi-family but they too are excessive in the number of people in those
units and the number of units based on space we're piling uh families into these little small 400
square feet spaces uh there's no opportunity for real families to be a part of this uh development
because the units are too small it's mostly students are geared toward more student housing
so uh it's just an indication that this is not suitable um it's too too excessive there's too
many units and there's no way for the community to micromanage uh egress well unit um because as the
community we just don't have those resources okay but miss cummings you did see what the
coordinating rco said right well i'm an rco as well in that effective i'm aware but the
coordinating rco is the one that came with provisos relative to trash and also how many
reducing the number of units both those were things being considered they weren't agreed to
necessarily we talked about what could possibly make it better but it's still too many units
okay all right i'm just telling you they sent a letter in dropping the units to four
well four units becomes five units is what i'm saying okay so if you can say you're not going
to use it but you still have that opportunity so you're putting 25 or more people in a in a
in a property at a time because they are each individual unit, not like a single family home.
All right. All right. Ms. Cummings, thank you. I do always appreciate what you call it. Thank you.
Is there anyone else in the virtual audience? There are no other hands, Chair. Planning Commission.
This is Ron Bednar, City Planning. The property is indicated for residential use under City Plan,
given the physical circumstances of the site, we recommend the request of variance to be granted.
Thank you. So MI 2023-002-084-2136 North Uber Street, I vote yes with provisos.
Maximum four dwelling units, commercial trash pickup, trash stored in the rear.
Thomas Solomon my vote is yes with proviso James Snell my vote is yes with proviso
Ishmael Shaheed my vote is yes with proviso
number six MI 2022 005 549 1500 Winsome Street Al Shermer is the attorney for the owner
we do not see an RCO letter
and a few other things here
Kyle Sherman is coming back in as a panel
Thank you
there we go hi Mr. Shermer how are you sir oh good afternoon hi could you state your name
please and spell for the court stenographer yes uh name is Hal H-A-L last name Shermer S-C-H-I-R-M-E-R
here as the attorney for the applicant lillian samuel right you swear or firm to tell the truth
the whole truth and nothing but the truth i do sir do you have an rco letter uh no we actually
Uh, no, we actually did not get any packet from the planning commission.
did not get any packet from the
Did you have a proof of, did you have a meeting?
Uh, no, we never got a meeting. And that is one of the exhibits that are the current, uh, are the current Atlas information for the property shows RCO as no, and then shows the 10th Ward, uh, Democratic.
uh we never had any outreach from and we've never we've never received do you have a tax clearance
uh i do have the payoff of the tax clearance i am asking the board to give us uh 10 days we have
the clearance however the tax clearance website would not let me back in i do have the information
from today showing a zero balance and would ask the board to give us a little bit of time only
because so um Ryan yes so we don't have an RCO letter or there was no meeting am I right with
that Mr. Shermer oh yes we never received any information from the planning commission I don't
know that we could go on with this uh yes Mr. Chairperson we're unable to go through this
hearing today I mean council will need to either contact rco.notification that's phila.gov
and either and they'll either you know give you give give him information regarding who the
coordinating rco is for the case if there is none then it is the responsibility of district council
office to decide who would hold the required meeting um and if that's the case then the
district council office will be the one that's indicated on the email the applicant or council
received um when the case was originally scheduled all right which are number so we're ninth district
so it is uh councilman phillips but we uh otherwise we are ready to go forward if so
we're so mr schirmer we're going to continue the case we're not going to go forward understood and
please take care of that and also and you know by that time you can have your tax clearance
certificate and also i i think we need interior photos that we don't have your photos or the
floor plan. Okay, we'll be
in touch or you'll let us know when
you make contact
with Marcio.
As soon as
we were waiting
for the Planning Commission's
information.
I think our council told you what you need
to do. Thank you.
Hi, Chair. This is Tanya.
Chair, if you don't mind,
I could put on a record for Mr.
Shermer that as soon as he arranges
the meeting and contacts
Ms. Dandy, the supervisor, we can immediately schedule him as opposed to our six-month window.
That's perfect. Thank you. Okay, Mr. Shermer. Thank you, Mr. Shermer.
Thank you, Tanya. You're welcome, Chair.
Number eight, MI 2023-002-195-2715-17 West Flora Street. Michael McElhaney is the attorney.
A letter of support from Brewery Town Chargedwood Civic Association.
Michael McElhenney is coming back in as a panelist.
Good afternoon.
Counsel, could you state your name, please, and spell for the court stenographer?
Michael McElhenney, M-C-I-L-H-I-N-N-E-Y.
Right.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Could you identify your client in relationship to this property?
My client is Flora, F-L-O-R-A, Street Flats, LLC.
And they are the owner of the property at issue.
Okay. Our vice chair has just a few questions for you.
Good afternoon, counsel. Do you agree to wait the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Thank you. Have you emailed in all the required documents and exhibits that are needed and able to proceed, in this case, five days in advance of this hearing?
Yes, I have.
Well, tongue twisted there.
Please proceed and share your screen.
Excellent.
Thank you.
On my screen is the index of exhibits that consist of exhibits 1 through 15.
Preliminarily, the – I'm going to move this to the other side.
The – our zoning appeal is at tab 11.
Our zoning poster showing the property was advertised with the zoning posters is at tab 12.
Exhibit 13 is the RCO neighbor notice letter.
We met with the RCO on June 15th, and we do have that letter of support that the chairman referenced.
My client's deed is at exhibit 14.
My client took title to the properties July 29th, 2022.
My client took title to the properties July 29th, 2022, and they are the owner of 2517 all the way through 2725 West Flora Street.
Our tax clearances were provided at tab 15.
There are three separate OPA accounts for these properties.
As part of my exhibit packet, we do have the vote total from the RCO, just showing 18 in support, 6 opposed, 2 abstained.
And after that letter was, that email was received, the RCO on Friday of last week did send the ZBA directly the letter of support that I have on the screen.
And the community was in support of the single family units that we're proposing with the off-street parking.
And they did request that we coordinate construction on a related project down the street that was before the board on August 2nd.
And we agreed to coordinate with that developer.
Our refusal is at tab two.
And I'll zoom in to summarize the refusal. Our application is to relocate lockout lines. We're going to create four lots from the existing five parcels. And we're proposing to erect four houses with roof decks, roof deck access structures.
and each of those four properties, three of them will have interior off-street parking
and one will have rear off-street parking. The property is zoned RSA 5, so that creates a
zoning refusal for the lot size we're creating. The minimum is $1,440. We are proposing lots that
are 835 square feet and we have a use refusal for the off-street parking. Parking is only allowed
by right from a shared driveway, alley, or rear street. Three of our houses are front-loaded
parking, and the fourth house is accessed from a side street. So that creates those use refusals.
Exhibit three is the zoning map for the property and the street map. The first photo just showing
we're zoned RCA5. The properties to the south of us are the Girard Avenue properties, zoned CMX 2.5.
looking at the second and third photos are just an overview overhead view of the immediate area
our property is bounded by style street to the north edding street to the east we are at flora
street to the south and we front on flora pennock street to the west what's unique about this area
and this immediate block there's no street parking on any of these four streets that i just
referenced. And on August 2nd, our neighbor came before the board for the same proposal at 1224-26
Pennock Street. And that was approved by the board on August 2nd, 2023. As you can see there,
they proposed a single family house with front-loaded parking, which as you'll see,
that's what we are proposing as well. Exhibit four is just a satellite 3D view to give context
to the immediate area in the Brewery Town neighborhood. At the time of purchase, my
client, this was a warehouse building. And exhibit five are historic photos of the property.
And if I can zoom in.
it's this warehouse building in the center of the property it had existing it was a storage
warehouse building that had existing curb cuts and off-street parking as part of that
that building that building has since been demolished as you'll see on exhibit six which
are our site photographs the property is currently a vacant lot that has been paved
by my client while we go through the zoning process. And turning to the second page, just
looking north at the properties on Edding Street, just showing there's no on-street parking on
Edding Street. And the block consists of single-family homes like my client's proposing.
The other photos are other angles looking down Edding Street on page three, looking to the south.
page three the last photo second photo are the properties to the north of us
which are existing off-street parking basically a surface parking lot to the north of my client's
properties and then the remaining properties on pennock street are existing single family
houses with off-street parking at 12 13 and 12 15 pennock and then that other property i referenced
12 24-26 pennock that was just approved by the board two weeks ago for single family with front
loaded off-street parking. The next photograph on page five is showing the view on Style Street,
just showing there's no street parking on the immediate block that my client's property is
located at. And the remaining photos are the properties on Style Street that are existing
and have off-street parking, such as 2717-19 styles. We have 2709 West Styles, 2705 West
Styles, 2704 West Cabot, that that property runs street to street. So this is an area that doesn't
West Cabot, that that property runs street to street. So this is an area that doesn't have
to have
on-street parking available. So bringing cars off the street, that's why we have the support
from the community. My client's subdivision plans at Exhibit 7. At the top of the screen
is the existing parcels. As you can see, they are set up currently at 16 feet wide by 35 feet deep.
uh four of those parcels the middle parcel is a double wide parcel that's 31 feet by 35 feet deep
our proposal is to redraw those lot lines to create four equal partials so reduce the unit
count from five to four and to create larger more sizable parcels so we're going from an average of
that 560 square feet lot size to lots that end up at about 835 square feet so we have properties
that become 26 wide or 23 wide by 35 deep.
Our zoning plan is at tab eight.
And I'll see if I can zoom in.
We're proposing, starting from east to west,
identified as premises E,
we are proposing one car off-street parking
for the first unit.
The next two houses would have two car off street parking and the corner property, because we're close to the corner, we would not have sufficient clearance so the parking off street parking is at the rear of that property.
And the proposal is dimensionally compliant we have a full seven foot side yard, or rear yard I should say, we comply with the open area and 38 foot height limit so our refusals again, is requesting off street parking because there is no street parking available over here.
and to create larger lots, but the lots we're creating won't be that 1440 minimum under the
current code. Exhibit 9 is our zoning package. We present it to the community, showing the rendering
for the property. As you can see, my client's proposing various materials as part of this
design. Brick on the ground floor, metal panels, and the use of cement boards. Each house will have
interior balconies to provide light and air and outdoor space, in addition to that roof deck,
roof deck access structure to provide more outdoor space for each of these four houses.
I'm not going to go through all the floor plans. I'll quickly just summarize. We end up with
four units. The first parcel, which is parcel A on the left, ends up as a three-bedroom,
or strike that four bedroom, four bath unit house, approximately 3,100 square feet.
And the other homes end up at three bedrooms, 2.5 baths each. And there's, again, they're about
3,000 square foot houses. So these are sizable homes that are being constructed on these lots
that we're proposing. And we are bringing cars off the street, one car on each of the end units
and two cars on the middle unit.
And with that being said,
and I guess the last photo is page eight
is just the elevation and rendering
showing that it's code compliant 38 feet
with the roof deck
and how the unit will look once constructed.
With that, members of the board,
I'd submit that based off the unique characteristics
of this block and these parcels were increasing the size of the parcels to make them larger and
closer to code compliance and providing off-street parking. The size and location of the property
does create a unique hardship, and this is the minimum variance necessary to afford my client
relief and to benefit the neighborhood. Bringing these cars will not increase traffic or congestion.
It will actually bring cars off the street and will be a benefit to the neighborhood to provide
housing at this location and removing that industrial commercial building from what is
a RSA 5 residential block. With that, I would call my client, Matt Lynch, should be on the call
to raise his hand. Mr. Lynch, could you state your name, please, and spell for the court stenographer?
My name is Matthew Lynch, M-A-T-T-H-E-W-L-Y-N-C-H. Do you swear or affirm the whole truth
nothing but the truth yes i did mr lynn did you hear the presentation i just made to the board
regarding your project yes i did and were my statements true correct and accurate to the best
of your knowledge information and belief yes they were and would you adopt my statements as if they
were your own yes no further questions questions from the board no mr chairman no chair
no chair questions or comments from the virtual audience
no chair questions or comments from the virtual audience
i see no hands chair planning commission uh ron bednar city planning the property is indicated
for residential use on the city plan or adopted district plan recommends no change to existing
zoning at this location the applicant's hardship is not supported with evidence of unique physical
circumstances or condition of the property that would prevent it from being used in conformity
with a code. Eliminating a sidewalk will significantly endanger pedestrian safety.
Therefore, we recommend the request of variance not be granted.
Number eight, MI 2023-002-195-2715-17 West Florida Street, I vote yes.
Thomas Holliman, my vote is yes.
James Snell, my vote is yes.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes.
Thank you, counsel.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Let's see here.
Number 10, MI20230021307622Caster Avenue.
Stephen Pollack is the attorney.
Letter of support from Ron Hurst Civic
and letter of non-opposition from Council Member O'Neill.
Stephen Pollack is coming back as a panelist.
Hi, Mr. Pollack, how are you, sir?
How are you today, Mr. Chairman and members of the board?
Good to see you.
Could you state your name, please, and spell it for the court stenographer?
My name is Stephen Pollack.
That's Stephen with the old-fashioned way, S-T-E-P-H-E-N.
Pollock, P-O-L-L-O-C-K, like my Uncle Jackson, who never gave me a painting.
Here you go.
That's great.
Do you swear for him to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
I do, Mr. Chairman, members of the board.
Could you identify your client and the relationship to this property?
My client is Gan Habad, which is the licensee and operator of a child daycare center on behalf of the owner,
Mahni Israel of Philadelphia
Lubavitch Center and I have with me
Mrs. Riska Weber who will be here to
testify and adopt our testimony at the end
and as usual Mr. Chairman if I may
bring Nico on and our
vice chair has a few questions for him and please bring Mr.
Nico on. Good afternoon counsel do you
agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its
Let me just clarify that. We were able to get, the board granted us permission to get an amended review by the licenses and inspections to Hillary, and Hillary passed on it on Friday before, or Thursday before she left, I think Friday before she left on vacation.
so we have a revised refusal at a6 and nico if you could if nico's there we'll pull it up because
we went from a refusal to a referral so we're for a special exception because there was confusion in
the way the the initial review was made we're asking we have an existing daycare center at 7620
the adjacent property we want to use uh all owned by the libovitz center we want to be able to use
7622, which is the main Lebovitz Center, also for part-time use for the child daycare center.
So now we have a referral that says for use as a daycare center at the first floor with an outdoor
accessory play area on the same lot with all other uses as previously approved, no sign on the
application, and it's a referral. So we want to be clear that that is what the board will be granted.
There's an amended refusal, right?
Right. Well, it's now it's switched to a referral. So we don't have that the hardship requirement. We just have to. All right. Okay. So that just as long as we clarify that we're good to go. And that's at our A6 in our exhibit package.
Proceed.
All right. Mr. Chairman, members of the board, Nico, if you pull up those pictures.
Hold on a second, counsel.
Oh, yeah. You got to go through, right?
Email all the documents that were needed five days in advance of the use.
We did, Mr. Shahid. We did.
All right. Thank you.
I mean, we had obviously had the meeting with.
So this is the Lubavitch Center and the where we're going to expand in on the side at Caster and Nathalie.
We'll have some pictures. I'll show you. This is our outdoor play area to the left.
The immediate building to the property to the left is where Godabad is right now.
it's 7620. There's a breach in the wall between 7620 and 7622 that allows the kids
There is a breach in the wall between 7620 and 7622 that allows the kids to go in between seven will allow kids to go in between 7620 and 7622.
So keep going down just so that the white go back where the car is.
That's where we're going to spread into the existing one.
Gan Habat is that first property to the left of the stucco building at 7622.
Go ahead.
so that's just we're tied to a beverage center a laundromat and nails and spas
just some more properties along castor avenue this is looking towards
the building that protrudes out is the beverage center the building just in front of that is
where we are existing there's some of our kids out on the walking back from a play area go ahead
this is our outdoor play area that's on 76 22 keep going just some more shots of the player
And this is Long Caster and Napfleet. Keep going, Nico, just to show that. And that's the rear of the property. And that's the housing behind us on Napfleet. Keep going. And it's just another shot of that, another shot. And that's a further view looking back towards Caster Avenue of our play area for the kids.
another house across the way and across the street from us on Nathley go ahead and then
that's our side looking at the side yard view of the outdoor player now go to our
and that's a corner view from Castor Avenue looking south towards Nathley southwest
and that's where we'll be go ahead I think we ought to go now to our our plans
that are in a different segment.
We had to break it up into two segments.
So this is the existing Lubovitch Center at 7622.
What we're going to do, keep going,
is this is how the building is set up.
We're going to use a portion of the building
in the existing prayer space, go to the next area.
And that's the area where we're going to expand in
with the childcare.
If you go back down,
we can show that there's an existing connection down here to the left where it says existing
foyer. And there's a, to the left, go over to the left a little bit. There's an actual little
breach in the wall and we provide at our exhibit A12 that shows the breach has already been
approved. So keep going. And we have a lunch program, you know, a daily schedule. We have a
lunch program that's approved. This shows some of the meals that are approved through this
program, CAACFP. We already have been existing at this location since 2012 with operating out of
the 7620 property with 29 children licensed by the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, as well as the
city of Philadelphia. And we're just really looking to move, have some space for some of
the younger kids in the back of 7622. So we have a pattern of how to handle traffic that
But we have a letter that we've put together that we've never had any problems with traffic dropping off and putting and picking up children right along Caster Avenue in that area.
So we believe that the history of this property being there, being used for this daycare center shows we're not congesting the public streets.
We're not overcrowding the land. We're not changing any of the outdoor, any of the structures.
So we're not impairing adequate supply of land, of air and light and air.
We're not burdening the water and sewer in public facilities because they're already existing.
And we believe we're not endangering the public health, safety and welfare.
And since it's a referral case now rather than a refusal, we think we're consistent with the comprehensive plan.
The days and hours of operation are Monday through Friday, 730 to about 530, 630.
You know, there is some after-school care for kids, and that's how it's been operating. We're not at 29 kids right now. The hope is that, you know, it ebbs and flows during the summer months.
So with that, if I may, we have pre-marked exhibits A1 through A17. As you noted, Mr. Chairman, we had a letter of support from the Roanhurst Civic Association for both the original request and the revised request as a referral.
Now, Len Leehorn has been a very generous and good zoning chair as the way he's treated us with regard to this application.
So I would move for all our exhibits and then I would ask that Riefka Weber be allowed to be promoted so she can come in to testify very quickly on this matter.
Yes. Come in to testify very quickly on this matter. OK, thank you, sir.
Okay, thank you, sir.
Rifka, are you there? You have to raise your hand. I know you're there. I'm here. Hello.
Could you state your name and spell it, please, for the court stenographer?
her. Sure. My name is Doba Weber, D as in David, O, B as in boy, A, Weber, W-E-B-E-R. My middle
name is Rivka, R-I-V-K-A. Thank you for clearing that up.
Or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth.
Rivka, you've been operating Gan Chabad at this location at 7620 since about 2012. Isn't that
correct? Yes, that's correct. Okay. And you've heard what I've stated on the record. Do you
do you agree that what I've stated is true and correct? And do you affirm it?
Yes, you did a great job. And thank you. Yes. Okay. And what I've stated on the record,
do you adopt that testimony as if it came out of your own mouth today? Yes. Okay. With that,
Mr. Chairman. Questions from the board? No, Mr. Chairman. No, Chair. Questions or comments from
the virtual audience? I see no hands, Chair. Cleaning Commission. This is Ron Bednar, City
Planning. The property is indicated for neighborhood commercial use on the city plan.
we recommend that the requested special exception be ran. Thank you. MI 2023 002 130 7622 Castro
Avenue. I vote yes per amended per referral dated 8-17-23. Perfect Mr. Chairman. Thomas
Solomon my vote is yes with proviso. Jane Snell my vote is yes with proviso.
My vote is yes with proviso. Thank you everyone. Thank you all. Happy Labor Day for everybody.
Thank you. Number 11 MI 2022 006 833 1713 North 42nd Street. Alan Mockamson is the attorney.
Mr. Nockamson is coming back in as a panelist.
Recommendation of support from Central Parkside CDC.
Good afternoon.
Mr. Nockamson, you were already sworn.
Just state your name, please, for the record.
Alan Nockamson.
And could you identify your client in a relationship to this property?
There are two corporate entities that own this property, 1713N42ndSTLLC and 2144NDARIANSTLLC, and in the virtual audience is Rod Sohn, its members.
Okay. Our vice chair has just a few questions for you.
Good afternoon, counsel. Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Have you emailed them all the required documents and exhibits that are needed to proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing?
Yes, we have.
Thank you. Please proceed and share your screen.
i'm here to present 1713 north 42nd street um we actually our office actually has received
similar uh variance approvals for 1715 1717 to 179 19 north 42nd street so what we're
proposing is not out of character alan could you get a little closer we're really struggling
I guess, I don't know, maybe I took a week off. Maybe my phone was off.
Maybe.
So, yeah, so it's not out of character what we're asking for, because this board on three separate occasions has approved similar zoning variances right next door.
So what I'm going to review with you is the notice of refusal that we received from L&I.
The correspondence we received from Centennial, Parkside, CDC, where they're now in support of this project, given the reduced unit count of four.
So we have a proviso for maximum four units.
We're also eliminating two of the refusals by decreasing the size of the building structure.
So we only have a single-use refusal.
um and through that we also have a an email from andrew goodman where their office stated
non-opposition to this project because of the support of the community we also have a zoning
uh board alan could you do me a favor could you send goodman's
you know to our attorney yeah it's in it's in the package yeah because i but i the last thing
note to our attorney yeah it's in it's in the package
we have here from counselor gathier is i she wrote something prior to the meeting and they sent that
okay i can read i mean it's in my presentation material okay fine fine fine yeah that's what i
meant i just attacked because we actually had i think it was 1715 we had to uh there were two
separate cases and we had that approved like several months ago so i have that same email
that was included as part of that.
But I can also resend this separately
to Hillary after the year.
So we have non-opposition for Mr. Goodman.
We also have our revised proviso plan,
which form completed,
which shows, again, reducing the unit count to four
and eliminating both of those dimensional refusals
for rear yard and occupied area
by way of the revised plans.
Right. Again, not out of character to have similar type of zoning for RSA 5. And we'll show you that maps of the area, photographs of the property or plans and drawings or RCO meeting notice or applications for appeal or deeds to the property showing that my corporate clients own the property.
And again, I have Mr. Sohn in the virtual audience who will raise his hand at the conclusion of my presentation, be sworn in, and then I'll have a couple questions about my presentation where he'll adopt my testimony as his own.
And the Certificate of Tax Clearance showing that we're in good standing with the city of Philadelphia.
First things first is our notice of refusal.
You can see it's a rather old refusal dated October 11, 2022.
We had a lot of meetings with the community that were very impactful, which ultimately we received their support for this project.
Again, originally we offered six units through negotiations and compromise.
We're agreeing to a maximum of four units.
We also had two other refusals regarding maximum occupied area and rear yards, which we're eliminating because of the reduction in the size of the building structure.
And then here's the correspondence from the coordinating RCO. As you can see, we have support from them now, as well as this is the email that we got from Andrew Goodman dated June 27th of 2023.
But ultimately, it stated because, you know, if we agree to four units, they would, you know, because of the size of the lot, which is rather large, they would be in agreement to not oppose this project.
And then here's our RCO, excuse me, revised proviso plan form.
We're reducing the occupied area to 75%.
We're increasing the rear air set back to nine feet.
We're adding a front porch to match the character of the surrounding properties, and we're reducing the unit count to four units.
And then here's our updated site plan.
And then nearby recently granted RSA multifamily variances.
uh you know again you know we have 1715 north uh 42nd street 1717 north 42nd street
and 1719 1719 north 42nd street under similar circumstances this board has granted
variances for multifamily uh use on these neighboring properties and then oops maps of
the area as you can see there's a mix of zoning we're not we're essentially a block and a half
away from Vermont Park um so and we're we have a trolley line on Girard Avenue so we have ample
public transportation and then this is a map showing that as well and then photographs of
the property um this has been a vacant lot for some time and you can see this goes far back as
As far back as Google Earth goes, we know that this has been a vacant lot for at least the last 15 years.
And then this is North 42nd Street to the right of the property, to the left of the property.
As you can see, there's a lot of vacancy here.
Proof of our notice poster being mounted to the property so everyone had notice of today's hearing.
And then our plans and drawings, as I stated, several compromises.
compromises. We reduced the size of the building structure. We also added a porch, and you can see
from the bay windows to match the architectural detail that you would expect in this part
of Philadelphia. Again, we have a trash room in here that is, you know, amenable to all of the
units as well, which was important to the group. And then our RCO meeting notice, we met last with
a group on June 20th. 120 addresses were notified in the meeting. List of those addresses, proof
list of those addresses, proof of mailing to those addresses or applications for appeal that
of mailing to those addresses, or applications for appear.
we filed on behalf of our corporate owners, along with the notice of refusal, the project information
form, and then the deeds of property showing that it's actually 1713 North 42nd STLC as the owner.
And then finally, our certificate of tax clearance. With that being said, I would ask that Raj
Raj virtually raised his hand to be sworn in.
Sir, you're free to speak.
Please unmute yourself.
Take your name, please, and spell for the court stenographer.
Raj Soin, R-A-J, last name S-O-I-N.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
may i uh yeah please see oh yeah i didn't hear all right uh raj you heard everything i had to
state about your zoning matter today yes i did and is it true and correct correct and do you
adopt as your own testimony i do thank you questions on the board no chair no chair
questions or comments from the virtual audience here we have jihad ali
mr ali please state your name and spell for the court stenographer
hello commissioner my name is jihad ali j-i-h-a-d-a-l-i do you swear or affirm to tell
the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth yes sir proceed so i'm a member of the
community and as the counselor is very familiar with me uh yeah i participate in all the meetings
around there we uh did engage in that dialogue with the developer and uh he's a developer is a
very nice guy our problem is it really was with the crowding of the neighborhood with the new as
the counselor said you know it's in the past we've been uh overwhelmed with so many so much
quantity of multifamily although we we support development um and you know most lawyers they
always point out that it's a vacancy. Well, it's not because of the community, it's because of
systemic racism and all the other things that held back African-American neighborhoods. So we're
glad to see development come in. We're glad to see investors putting money. It just has to be
done with our cooperation. This developer has been a real nice guy, but he just needs a little
bit more supervision of his workforce because, you know, we still get a lot of trash left on
the sidewalk. We did have an agreement about construction, Counselor. Do you recall that
about, you know, the hours of operation and picking up trash and so forth and so on?
I mean, again, these are conversations I believe that you had directly with Mr. Sohn. I know there
are L&I regulations regarding construction hours. And in terms of obviously respect to the community
to make sure that his current construction sites in your community are kept clean and responsibly maintained.
Yeah, that's all we want.
And, Mr. Chairman, we do support this with the new change.
I just want to defer it to the Councilwoman's office because it was only through their help that we were able to make these changes.
But whatever you decide, sir.
Thanks for taking the time to call in.
Is there anyone else in the virtual audience?
I see no handshare.
uh planning commission uh ryan bednar city planning the property is indicated for
residential the city plan given the physical circumstances of the site we recommend the
requests of variance be granted provided maximum two units only okay thank you um
ryan did you see there was a so there would be a permitted uh
uh a refusal dated right five did i see that eight eighteen yeah i'm just looking for it right
now yeah i think alan showed that ding alan the amended refusal see an amended refusal i i have
revised plans i could be incorrect but i don't believe that we have an amended refusal so what
so then we would just inside the dwellings and make that a proviso how many dwellings yeah i mean
And it's in our revised plans, but yes, Mr. Chair, as a precautionary matter, I would request that, say, maximum four units, and then the other proviso would be the revised plan.
Okay. All right.
MI 2022-006-833, 1713 North 42nd Street, I vote yes, proviso, maximum four units, and revised plans 818-23. Does that sound right, Alan?
8-18-23. Does that sound right?
Alan? I don't have the date in front of me
of the revised plan. I saw the one page you said. It said 8-18.
Okay. All right. Thank you.
Vote, guys.
James Snell, my vote is yes with proviso.
Yep. Thank you.
My vote is yes with proviso.
You have your three votes.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Have a great day.
Okay, thank you.
Number 12.
MI 2023-001-980-400 North Front Street.
Brandon Saverin is the attorney.
Letter of support, Northern Liberties Neighbors Association with...
unenforceable provisos, and letter of non-opposition from Council Member Squill.
Brandon Saverin is coming back in as a panelist.
Mr. Saverin, could you state your name, please, and spell for the court stenographer?
Yes, my name is Brandon Saverin. It's B-R-A-N-D-O-N, and then S as in Sam, A-V as in Victor, R-A-N as in Nancy.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Could you identify your client, a relationship to this property?
Yes. So my client is 400N, as in North Front Street, LLC. And Chris Parker is the representative
here today.
All right. Our vice chair has just a few questions for you.
Good afternoon, counsel. Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and step you date
to its accuracy yes i do mr vice chairman 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 i did
thank you please proceed counsel thank you
okay um so i i can see that my entire monitor is being shared i'm gonna if this is too small
all you'll just let me know but can you see the aerial yeah we we see it we see okay okay great
so um the property we're here about today is 400 north front street um i'm currently in exhibit
five in our exhibit binder this is an aerial photograph from atlas.phila.gov showing you
the property between the red arrows the property is on the northwest corner of front street and
Callow Hill Street. This is sort of a funny little residential neighborhood you might be
familiar with. It sits between I-95 and Columbus Boulevard along Callow Hill. So some of these
properties are older, like my clients, which we believe is over 100 years old. And there's also
some newer multifamily buildings in the area. But basically, this is a part of the old city area
that was spared the I-95 wrecking ball.
I'm going to go to exhibit seven
to show you a couple of photos
of the exterior of the building.
So this is the exterior of the building
taken in 2020.
And the reason I'm going back a few years
is actually to show you in the window here,
this sort of sign announcing
that the tenant of that space has left
Because that's the space I'm here to speak about today.
So what has been in this building since my client purchased it in 2019, and this is the
building, it's a pretty long building, it's got all these windows you see here, are four
apartments, I believe most of which have their own doors directly to the exterior, and a
space that's permitted as an office space, which also has its own door, where my cursor
and this was captured in that 2020 photo from Atlas. You can see this sign that the last tenant
put in the window announcing that they left. So it says Eastern Scaffolding has moved to a new
location in South Philadelphia. So Eastern Scaffolding had a yard where they stored their
materials around the corner from this and this space was used as an office and by office what
I really mean is a storage space for their paper files. But they left right around when my client
bought the building. And my client has worked to put somebody in there. You know, he waited to come
before you today for years after failing to get an office tenant, but wasn't able to do so. So
but wasn't able to do so. So because of that, we'd like to convert this space to a residential
So because of that, we'd like to convert this
unit, which we believe it used to be many years ago. And as such, we need a variance for five
dwelling units over the four that are currently on the property. So this on Exhibit 2 is our
notice of refusal, and we have just one use refusal. We are in the RM1 zoning district,
So this is a multifamily zoning district.
It's just that our lot isn't quite big enough to allow for five dwelling units by right.
So the examiner wrote that 1920 square feet of surface area is required for five units.
We have 1376 square feet.
um i wrote a memo of law to the board at exhibit one that discusses the bat the sort of the
background facts of the case in the first section which i basically just gave you so i'm not going
to read through that it then uh goes through the law on you know what an applicant must do
to qualify for a use variance. And then I give my argument. In the argument, I walk through
that my client satisfies all of the requirements for a use variance. I won't read through all that.
I'll just give you a very brief overview of what maybe is the most important requirement,
and that's that we have a hardship. So as I mentioned, my client has failed to get an office
tenant in that space in the four years that it's owned the property. Why is that? Well,
part of the reason may be that to our knowledge, there are no other non-residential uses on
Calla Hill Street between I-95 and Columbus Boulevard. So we're looking for somebody right
now under the current zoning permit that wants an office space in a purely residential block
with no dedicated parking. That's a really hard sell. Further, if they do something with that
space that isn't strictly office, as it's defined in the code, as I believe professional office,
if it's, say, retail or a commercial use that's slightly different, that would require a variance
too. Here's why that matters. There's a couple reasons. One, I'm going to take the position
before you today that we are requesting the minimum necessary relief because we need a
variance to do anything here other than continued office, which has proven to be impossible.
So going after a variance for a fifth unit is at least in line with the residential zoning of this
property, as opposed to going for a variance for some other use entirely, which is not at all
related to the property zoning. And as I mentioned, there's other facts in this memo.
The last one I'll highlight is that we believe there's over 4,400 square feet of interior space
in this building. So if you sort of average out, that would mean that with five dwelling units,
there would be an average of over 800 square feet of interior space per apartment. So the
building can handle five units. And as I'll show you in the past, we believe that it used to have
five units. Just to drive the point home that there is other multifamily in this area, this is
the front street, the narrower side of our building, and you'll see on the right at 402 North Front,
this is a nine-unit building that was recently constructed right next door to us. I then,
rather than just giving you photos of construction, pulled some permits at Exhibit 12. So this is a
permit further up our block 412-38 North Front Street, that property per this permit contains
32 condominium residential units. Also on our own block at 408 North Front Street,
that building contains 10 dwelling units per its active zoning permit. And then here is the
permit for that photo I showed you, our next door neighbor at 402 North Front Street. That
building contains nine dwelling units. Flipping through my notes here. I only need probably a
couple more minutes and then I'll wrap up. Just want to show you our RCO letter at Exhibit 10.
So here is the notice that my law firm created to announce the RCO meeting. It was hybrid,
so it was an in-person meeting that was broadcast virtually as well. Chris and I both attended that
Chris and I both attended that meeting ourselves. Here's our proof of mailing. Here's the RCO letter. The first page is really short. It's signed by the coordinating RCO's chairman, Larry.
meeting ourselves. Here's our, you know,
The second page is where Larry actually gives his justification for the RCO supporting our proposal.
um essentially what it says is that larry's group the northern liberties neighbors association
conferred as did we directly with the river's edge community um that is like a subgroup that's
not an official rco that it's sort of like a neighbor's association for this tiny little
neighborhood so nlna wanted to make sure that recca river's edge was comfortable with us
converting that office space to a fifth unit. And they were. So that's something Larry highlights
in this letter. And then Larry discusses that the vote at the RCO meeting beyond RECA was five in
favor to an opposition and one who abstained or wasn't opposed. Larry did request that we added
street trees. And I thank you for clarifying, Mr. Chairman, that that may not be an enforceable
proviso. Nonetheless, there are already tree pits on our block. So we just went ahead and put trees
in them. Anyway, just to demonstrate here that we are not trying to skirt what the RCO wants.
We're trying to be good neighbors. I also have a letter of non-opposition from Councilman
Squilla's office, which isn't in my packet because I just received it last night, but it's on your
screen right now. And then I'll quickly show you. Come on. There we go. Oh, sorry. Okay. Back in
business. Back in my exhibit packet, I have our own properties, historic zoning permits, the one
that sort of predates our current permit. And the only one I'm going to highlight for you right now
is this permit from 1985 that addresses that the prior owner at that point applied for there to be
five apartments in this building. And then after that was approved at later points in time,
you can see that it appears that that space is declared to be vacant. Then that space is
declared to be a garage. Then that space is declared to be a beauty salon on these different
permits. So that space has had sort of a bit of a Frankenstein existence, but we really feel like
given what the neighborhood is now with all of these apartments around us, it's time to
put that back into service as an apartment unit, a fifth apartment unit. And the last thing I'll do
here, because the solicitor requested that I do so, was to show you some interior photos of the
building, since I don't have a floor plan for the whole building. This is the office space here at
Exhibit 13. You can see that the tenants sort of trashed it when they left, but it does have this
big window. It's a nice size space. It has a staircase down to a portion of the basement,
which it's sort of privately connected to. And this is the door out to Callahill Street.
the basement is like bonus space it's not that you know we necessarily need anyone to sleep down
here that's not the intent but we are going to put in at least our plan is right now an egress well
to bring some natural light into this space and it can serve as bonus space because it's it's
you know nice size and then last last thing just to show you some photos of the other four units
that are already in this building, Chris maintains them very nicely. Here's the kitchen for one of
them, bedroom in that unit, other bedroom. So that's a two bedroom. Here's another unit with
its sort of living room and kitchen. Here's that apartment's bedroom. Here's a third unit's kitchen
and its first bedroom and its second bedroom. And here's a fourth unit's kitchen and its bedroom.
So just to say, again, all of these units are a nice size. This one will be as well. We're not trying to, like, shoehorn, you know, five units in a building that shouldn't accommodate them.
Bring the money and bring your client on.
Sure. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. So, Chris Parker, could you raise your hand?
Chris Parker, you've been allowed to speak.
Hi, Mr. Parker, could you state your name and spell, please, for the court stenographer?
Chris Parker, C-H-R-I-S-P-A-R-K-E-R.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Proceed, counsel.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. So, Chris, first order of business, are you authorized to speak on behalf of 400 and Front Street, LLC?
Okay. Did you hear my testimony in this zoning case today?
And was it true and accurate to the best of your knowledge, information, and belief?
And would you therefore adopt it as if it had been your own testimony?
Yes, I would.
Thank you.
Questions from the board?
No, Chair.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
As you know, he is Chair.
Cleaning Commission.
It's Ron Bednar City Planning.
The property is indicated for residential use on the city plan or adopted.
District plan recommends no change to existing zoning at this location.
The applicant's hardship is not supported with evidence of any physical circumstances or condition of the property that would prevent it from being used and conforming with the code.
The density requirements of the code in particular are asserted in not compliance.
Therefore, we recommend the request for Vance to not be written.
Thank you. MI 2023-001-980-400 North Front Street. I vote yes.
James Snell, I vote yes.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes.
Brandon, you have your votes.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you, everybody.
Is there anyone in the virtual audience who were on the two o'clock list and their case has not been called?
I see no hands, Chair.
We're going to take a five-minute break and we'll come back and we'll knock out the 3.30 list.
Let's get our court reporter straight, and then we'll be back in five minutes, everybody.
Thank you.
Thank you, Chair.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Mr. Kelly, are you back?
Yes, Chair.
Thank you.
How do we look?
Fatina?
Lakeisha?
looking good chair yes chair i know you're ready to we're ready to go
thank you yes thank you good afternoon my name is bill bergman and i will be chairing
this afternoon zba hearings with me as our vice chair ismail shaheed
president mr chairman our board member thomas holliman
he may be having a hard time with his phone our board member james snell president mr chairman
also president is our ryan mcshary our uh council and our executive director tanya sunken
here's our virtual format be advised the proceedings are being recorded the video
will be available by contacting Tanya Sunken at philo.gov. For the benefit of our court stenographer,
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
to the property in question. And last, the question and answer box on the screen is not
for comments or testimony. All comments should be directed to our Executive Director, Tanya Sunken.
Let's look at our schedule for this afternoon. Number three, MI 2022-004-360-10960 Dutton Road.
The case is continued. Mark must be tried. Number eight, MI-2022-001-391-5221 Haverford Avenue.
Case is continued. Mark must be tried. And number nine, MI-2022-001-391-5222.
And number nine, MI-2022-001-395-341 North 52nd Street, case is continued, mark must be tried.
Are there any other requests for continuance on this afternoon's list?
Good afternoon, Chair. This is Fatina L. I'll be your co-host, and I see no hands.
Thank you. I also have a case that does not have exhibits. MI-2022-004-978-1637 North 20th Street. Eric Johnson is the listed applicant and the owners are Norma and Joseph Hicks. No exhibits, second listing. No one appeared at the first listing.
i see no handshare so mi2022 004 978 1637 north 20 street um we have no exhibits this is the
second listing and no one appeared at the first listing i vote to dismiss
James Snell. Dismissed.
Ishmael Shahi, my vote is to dismiss. Thank you. We're going to start with number seven,
which is a pro se case. MI 2023-001-316, 1839 Chalet Street. Ann and Anthony Creato are the
owners pro se, there's applications for the erection of an addition above an existing
attack structure with a roof deck accessed by a roof deck access structure for use as a single
family household living, size and location as per plans. If abutting lots of both sides of an
attached building contain only two stories of enclosed area, the stories above the second
story of the, I'll be back at additional eight feet from the minimum distance between the front
facades and the front lot lanes. There's also a letter of support from the Packer Park and Civic
Association. Could you state your name, Anthony, could you state your name, please, and spell for
the court stenographer? Anthony Criato, A-N-T-H-O-N-Y, C like cat, R-E-A, T like Tom, O.
do you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth
yes our vice chair has just a few questions hello sir 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 thank you please proceed and share your screen okay
be the green button at the bottom right um yeah i'm i'm sorry i just want to do the
window i guess yeah there we go i think um entire screen yeah i don't uh
i slept a tab oh here i'm sorry
there we go okay sorry um good afternoon uh it'll come up yep i see all right good afternoon
everyone thank you for um uh having the hearing for us here um so my wife and i are the homeowners
uh for 1839 chalet street and um uh we are uh owners and we've been in the city for
uh almost 20 years now and we're trying to expand um expand our residence we're the
owners and we intend to stay uh so we're just trying to get a little bit more space we have
kids that are getting older and um it's just getting getting a little bit tight so um we are
trying to put on a third floor to our home our existing home and um uh there is a
a regulation, which I'm sure you guys are aware that, uh, the, um, the addition needs to be set
back, uh, eight feet from the front of the house. And we would like to, uh, start the addition
from the very front of the house and extend it, uh, to the back. So like the whole, the entire,
um uh the entire top of the house and um so we're asking for a uh i guess an exception
so that we may do this and um there's a couple uh a couple reasons why uh we have uh there's
several houses um there's two on our block and uh two on the adjacent blocks and and a couple
Two on the adjacent blocks and a couple more in the neighborhoods, the blocks, I'm sorry, surrounding us that do just that, where the houses come, the third floors go all the way out to the front face of the house.
more in the neighborhoods that
So this is the application that our architect, Landmark, and Vince Mancini has helped to create.
And we're just seeking a modification to – a slight modification of the code so that we can – that we could proceed.
And I can show you what the house would – the addition would look like.
I'm just going to scroll down.
So these are these are deeds that we have in the House that we're able to do this.
So let me just get down to here. That's a tax clearance that we are paid, that we're all paid for our taxes.
zero dollars do um so if you can see that uh right down here at the the bottom for it's exhibit z
dash 1.0 uh that would be what the um addition would look like so the the dark gray part is
where the addition would be and it comes out all the way to the front rather than um coming eight
uh starting eight feet why don't you raise it up a little bit that added comments sort of blocking
at everything oh i'm sorry oh did i screw it up it's okay oh brother sorry about that sir let me
just pull this up here one more time um all right okay can you see that okay yeah we see yep so
that's um so the kind of a dark shaded part up top would be the addition uh so we're just trying
to add that on um there's actually there's three houses uh one on the 19th street and two on our
block that that pretty much have this identical um third floor where it it's uh going to come
right out to the front so so uh vince mancini and um landmark uh designed it so that it would
blend in it wouldn't uh it wouldn't change kind of the character of the neighborhood it would
he would keep aesthetically very pleasing, um, as well. And, um, these are just, I get, uh,
some of the interior plans. So this is what, uh, this is what the house looks like right now,
just some photos. And that's a front view of what the house would be right here. Uh, what that,
what that top would look like. Um, so our neighbors are, are, are good with this. Um,
We got great neighbors and we, my wife and I brought this to our civic association meeting as our house right there. And we have a letter from the civic association saying that there were no objections to
uh to this project uh as well and then up here is a uh just invoice so we sent out
uh we we sent out a mailing to notify everyone uh according to the law within a certain radius
of the house that there was going to be a hearing and there was going to be um
um a community meeting so if there was any uh questions or or problems to please um attend
the meeting as well so there's a couple exhibits here uh so like the technical excuse me the
technical um drawings here that um maybe our architect could explain if you have questions
we're okay i think you've explained it well let me ask should he have pictures of any other houses
that already have it um actually yeah i can i got google maps right here i'm gonna i can show you if
why don't you show us how many how many homes you think at packer park now have additions
uh so the addition we're trying to do so i'm i'm just gonna run down the blocks let's see on ours
like i said there's there's two there's two more on 18th street so that's four so this is our block
right here um we're right here at 18 18 39 right here so over here on 19th there's the same exact
um no just if you would show us one please uh yeah sure let me just um
I'm sorry, pull this up right here.
All right, so let me spin around.
So there's one right there.
That's what it basically looked like.
He's got the two windows.
Can you put that up?
I can't see it.
i'm sorry um is that a little better can you see that it's it's not here okay um it's probably
I'm sorry.
Is that a little better?
Can you see that?
telling i share this tab sorry um okay okay very good that's exactly what yours will look like
uh yeah this has got the one window i mean two um and i believe the architects designed it to have
just one window but um there was one that put i don't think i think this google map photo yeah
there it is that's another one right there that's okay basically what it would uh i don't know about
the dimensions and such but that's the look that's the uh the aesthetic i guess if you want to call
it that okay thank you uh questions from the questions from the board no chair
no chair questions or comments from the virtual audience
I see no hands, Chair.
Planning Commission.
Ron Bednar, City Planning.
Property is indicated for residential.
On our city plan, the applicant's hardship is not supported with evidence of any physical circumstances
or condition of the property that would prevent it from being used as the code requires.
Therefore, we recommend the request of advantage, not for granted.
Thank you.
M-I-2023-001-316-1839, I vote yes.
James Snell, I vote yes.
Ishmael Shaheen, my vote is yes.
You have your vote, sir.
Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
Sure, thank you.
Number one, MI-2022-005-152, 1324 North 15th Street, Olak Sakalov is the attorney.
letter of support from United Neighbors Alliance Civic Association.
Hi, Mr. Sokolov, could you state your name, please, and spell for the court stenographer?
Sure. Good afternoon, Chair Bergman, members of the board, Oleg Sokolov, on behalf of 1324 North 15th Street.
My name is O-L-E-G-S-O-K-O-L-O-V.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Our vice chair has just a few questions for you, sir.
Thank you.
Good afternoon, counsel.
Do you agree to weigh the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Good afternoon, Mr. Shahid, and yes, I do.
Have you emailed in all the required documents and exhibits that are needed and required to proceed with this case in advance of this hearing?
I have.
Thank you. Please proceed to share your screen to Council.
Thank you very much.
All right, once again, good afternoon, Chair Bergman, Vice Chair Shahid, members of the Board.
As stated, I'm here on behalf of the property owner, Summit Property, LLC, for 1324 North 15th Street.
I will try to be brief, as I believe this is just an administrative matter that has put us here before you.
This property was granted a zoning permit in 2012, allowing for the new construction of a five-unit building with a commercial unit on the ground floor.
At the time of that initial permit issuance, the ground floor unit was set as a vacant commercial unit.
Subsequent to that, the previous owner moved in a hair salon falling under personal services when Summit Properties purchased the property in 2021,
One, having some issues, realizing that a specific use permit was required and put in a use application, which generated the refusal that I'll move to in a moment.
So if I may just quickly take you through the exhibit packet.
Here's the deed from the previous owner to Summit Properties.
And here's the refusal you'll see stated. We're looking for a variance to allow for the existing hair salon that has been there for some time to just be granted the use on the ground floor.
to to just be granted the use on the ground floor and and the existing five unit dwelling as previously approved above.
Here's our application for appeal.
Our community notice meeting. We met with the community on March 8. It was an in-person meeting.
Our proof of mailing, we sent notice to 126 of the nearby neighbors.
Pardon me.
here's an external image of the property
and i would just mention as you'll see in a moment this this hair salon has been
used by many many people in the neighborhood many of whom have signed letters of support for this
project and that is it right there
it is a corner property
i will these are uh letter additional letters of support from members in the community many of
the people who sign this these letters
are patrons of the salon and and love having it there so
and chair forgive me but i don't have an exact number on how many of these we have but as you
can see it says 49 it says 49 does it okay
All right, here's our zoning poster placed in the window.
Here's the notice itself.
Our tax clearance, let me just try and zoom in a little in here.
My apologies, Gordon.
our tax clearance
zoning poster
photos of the poster placed in the window
why don't you bring your client on Mr. Sokoloff
Thank you. I have Mr. Sam Patel, a representative of Summit Properties here.
If you could raise your hand, please.
And then I will just quickly say we did meet with the community on March 8th and did receive their support as noted.
So here is the letter from the United Neighbors.
That's correct.
Mr. Patel has been allowed to speak.
Hi, sir. Could you please state your name and spell for the court stenographer, please?
Yes, good afternoon, everyone. My name is Nehal Patel, S-N-E-H-A-L. Last name is Patel, P-A-T-E-L.
Right. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Correct. Yes.
Proceed, counsel.
Good afternoon, Mr. Patel. Just quickly, you are an authorized representative of Summit Properties LLC, correct?
Okay. And you've heard my testimony here today?
Yes. And was it true and accurate to the best of your knowledge?
and was it true and accurate to the best of your knowledge?
Absolutely.
Absolutely. Yes. Okay. And would you adopt it as your own?
Yes. Okay. Thank you. Questions?
Go ahead. Proceed, sir. Anything you'd like to add, Mr. Patel?
No, I just want to say thank you to the board. Thank you for your time and considering this application.
Thank you. Questions from the board?
No, Chair. No, Chair.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
I see no hands, Chair.
Planning Commission.
Ron Bednar, City Planning.
While the property is currently indicated for residential use on the city plan,
given the physical conditions of the site, and it's documented use history,
we have no objection.
Thank you.
Thank you.
MI 2022-005-152-1324 North 15th Street.
I vote yes.
James Snell, my vote is yes.
Ishmael Shahid, my vote is yes.
Thank you, counsel.
Thank you, Gordon.
Number two on our list, MI 2022-005-175-400-Gilham Street.
Thomas Kenney is the attorney.
No RCO letter at this point.
Mr. Kenney is coming back in as a panel.
Right, right.
Hi, Mr. Kenney. Could you state your name, please, and spell for the court stenographer?
I can. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Jacob Reeder, actually, I'm a paralegal for Mr. Kenney.
He stepped out just a moment. I'm going to get him if it is okay with the board.
Okay. Thank you.
Thank you very much, sir.
good afternoon hi good afternoon could you please state your name and spell it for the
court stenographer? Yes, this is Tom Kenny. And I'd also like panel, sir, chairman, if I could
add my paralegal, Jacob, who's on here, but I'd like to add him. He's going to be doing my screen.
Yeah, he'll just do the screen, right? Just for the record, could you spell your name for the
court stenographer? Yes, sir. It's Thomas Kenny, K-E-N-N-Y, bar number 77611.
Right. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, sir, I do. Our vice chair has a few questions for you.
Thank you.
Good afternoon, Counsel. Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
I do, Vice Chair. Thank you.
Have you emailed in the required documents and exhibits that is needed to proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing?
I have, Vice Chair.
Thank you. Please proceed and share your screen.
Could I ask, Mr. Kenney, let me ask the question. We have a note here there's no RCO letter.
and that's what i was going to ask you i have i had information that they sent it to you
as a uh matter of course it's part of our if it's part of our package here
and we've marked it on page 64 it was a 40 to 0 in support of us okay i thought i thought
We just didn't see it yet.
Ryan, would you raise the parking issue before we go any further?
Yes, Mr. Chair, thank you.
So I think there's one potential issue with this matter.
We might be missing a refusal for the required minimum parking spaces, and RSA 3 would be 4.
So essentially, if there are existing parking spaces on this property, the refusal needs to be amended before the board can vote.
um and however if there are no existing parking spaces and if the board does does grant the
variance uh the board would need to improvise them they would also be approving a variance
uh for not having the required four spaces any new required parking spaces would require separate
zoning permit application because the plans would need to be revised and it would be a
and it would be a change of the use application that's understood and we're not we're not asking
change of the use application that's understood and we're not we're not asking
for that and well how many parking places do you have uh there are if there are no parking
i don't think we have any parking
so so ryan it's street parking it's street parking okay uh
So, Ryan, let's explain that one more time.
He has no parking.
So, and then in that case, if the board does choose to grant the variance, they'll need
to add a proviso, noting that it's approving the variance for not having required four
spaces.
All right.
Proceed, sir.
Chairman and board, if it may please the court.
I think this is a pretty straightforward case, but here's what happened.
My client is in the chain of third purchaser, husband and wife.
The one who will be speaking today is Ms. Lynn Q.
She is here, and I'll add her in a few seconds.
But the property had always been used as a four-unit.
In fact, there was a legitimate rental license printed out in 2004.
It's on page as Jacob, if he can put that up for us.
And I'll jump back to everything else. I just want to point this out.
So this was given the two owners ago,
Olszinski had a rental license through the city of Philadelphia for four
units.
this property has always been four units it was built to be four units there has been from as
far as back as we can tell it's been used as a four unit apartment that's how it was constructed
there's four there's four bathrooms there's four units separate units it's at four utilities
everything was constructed that way we're not sure if this was the records don't reflect if
it was somehow a grandfather situation or something like that back in the old days.
But nonetheless, it's going back to now the top of this. It was an RSA3. It's a single family
dwelling. That is what the refusal was. We filed the appeal. If I can go back up to top, Jacob,
we can just go through the documents. The refusal was issued on July 13, 2022.
There would be no construction, no alterations. Everything, like I said, has been in place
for a few decades. My client has not done any construction, nor does she need to do any
construction to the property. We filed the appeal. If we can go to that on six.
We filed the appeal and
on page 17 we have the deed it's in my client's name her she's it's her and her husband my client
is here today is miss ling q um her husband mr john z is also given us authorization that's on
page 38 i'll come back to that in a minute um on page 22 we put up our posters at the property
um we have some photographs of inside the property as well just to show again what the
interior looks like we have some pictures of what the apartment we could just go to the inside
utility separated too yes everything is separate so the this is one unit how it's how it was set
up um kitchen separate kitchen separate bedrooms uh separate bathrooms um you'll see um that's
it looks that's how it looks there's all the it looks like if you see this apartment complex
um that was that was set up um
we have a tax clearance on page 48 we sent out notice to the neighbors and we had a meeting
it was scheduled for november 17 at saint williams social hall we did meet with the rco
It was a favorable meeting. That's the letter I referred to in the beginning of this. It's down on page 64. After our meeting, which was very genial, we had 40 to nothing. There was no opposition to our application.
our application. I do note that we've copied the Honorable Cheryl Parker throughout this whole
I do note that we've copied the.
process. Obviously, she's a little busy now, as she's got a new job that she's going to be coming
on to, but we've not received anything from the Councilmatics saying they have any opposition to
it. So that is the best information I can give to that. And with that, sir, I would then like to
call my client. Okay.
Ma'am, Link,
Ms. Q, if you could put your hand up
on the screen.
There she is.
Hi, could you state your name, please, and spell for the
court stenographer? Yes.
My name is Link Q, L-I-N-G
Q-I-U.
Right. Do you swear or affirm to tell
the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Proceed, counsel.
Thank you, Sarah.
The only thing I'll say is my client, English is her second language, and she's a little ill today, but I wanted to let the board know.
Ma'am, can you hear me okay?
And you've heard everything I've said here today?
All right.
Everything you've heard me say, is it true and accurate to the best of your knowledge?
Yes, but we have two parking on the nearby building.
plus the street parking.
There is parking already at the structure?
Yeah, I thought I saw it in that one picture.
I saw it, so I wasn't clear
if that was the neighbor's house or not.
Thank you for everyone.
Is everything else accurate,
what I said today?
Okay, and you would adopt
everything i said is true and accurate yes okay thank you ma'am thank you um questions from the
board no chair no no chair thank you questions or comments from the virtual audience
i see no hands chair planning commission the rod bednar city planning given the
The property is indicated for residential on a city plan, and given its physical condition and the documented use history, we recommend the request for that to be granted.
Thank you.
Ryan, so this would be a variance for not having two spaces?
It would be, it's four required spaces.
But I think they say they have two.
They have two, so it would be for not having the two additional spaces that would normally be required.
Yes, good. Thank you. MI 2022-005-175-400, Gillum Street, I vote yes.
Also include a proviso that there's a variant for not having the two additional parking spaces.
James Snell, my vote is yes with proviso.
Thank you, Mr. Kenny.
Thank you. May I be excused?
You certainly can.
Have a nice day, everybody.
Thank you.
Number four, MI 2023-001-315-5331 Wayne Avenue.
Jermaine Harris is the attorney.
Letter of support from the 12th Democratic Ward RCO Coordinating Committee.
Solo Germantown is opposed, but has recommended provisos.
Good evening, members.
Good evening, Mr. Harris. How are you?
I'm fine. How are you?
Jermaine Harris, counsel for the owner, which is Cinderella Realty, LLC.
and i do have spell your name for the court reporter please sure jermaine uh that's j-e-r-m-a-i-n-e
uh harris h-a-r-r-i-s right my address is 100 south broad street uh suite 1523 that's uh philly
one nine one one zero right do you swear a firm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the
truth i do and i also would like to add that i do have a representative of a cinderella realty
Lamont Thomas here. Okay, and our vice chair has just a few questions for you, sir. Sure.
Good afternoon, counsel. Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its
accuracy? I do. And I will stipulate to its accuracy. Have you emailed in all the required documents?
Have you emailed in all the required documents and exhibits that are needed to proceed with this case in advance of this hearing?
Yes, I have.
Thank you. Please proceed and share your screen.
Okay. Everyone can see my screen?
We can.
Okay. All right. So this is concerning 5331 Wayne Avenue. And what my client is seeking to do is he's seeking to reinstate the previous zoning for this particular property for a multifamily property.
This is a property that is, it was a five-family property, and it was originally, the zoning history is that it was zoned originally as a five-family in 1954.
It was then reaffirmed in 1991 by this board as well.
However, the property has been vacant for some time, and as a result, the property lost, of the vacancy, the property lost its zoning because it's in a RSA 5 area.
However, this is a property that's still, it's a large property. It's 3,600 square feet and it has a fire escape right here. It has three separate entrances and it's broken up as to, it's broken up as to the five separate apartments.
that right now what you're seeing is the exterior let me get to the interior uh and by the way
these are the uh posting of the zoning uh hearing notice as well
so what we have here is let's get to
Just bear with me, please, I'm having trouble opening up this.
Thank you.
Thank you for your patience.
Okay, here we go.
Okay, so we have a quick claim deed, which evidences the ownership of the current owner, Cinderella Realty, for 5331.
This is a property that was acquired December 27th of 2022.
two. We also have, let's see here. I think we were looking for inside photos, right?
Yeah, I'm getting, well, I'm going to get to that in a second. We have, we have the letter of refusal
and it does, the refusal does reflect that it was part of a five, that it was
a five family dwelling as of 1954 and then 1991 so I want to show that
let's get to the interior photos it's it's mainly a shell right now
so it's not really a whole lot to show you because it's not really safe but
this is of one of the apartments this is as of another of the apartments
another of the apartments it's a total five right now it's another one of the apartments
and this is another one of the apartments the second floor this was the third
And this is another one of the apartments, the second floor. This was the third floor, one of the units. Let me get to the plants so you can see.
Okay. So it's a three-story building, and there's parking in the front. There's two
parking spaces that's proposed in front of the building, which is reflected right here,
the parking the the remaining parking will be uh on street parking then you have unit one
which is in the front of the building it will be by it would be by level so it would be
the front and then the second floor level two it would be that would also be in the front
then you have unit two which is the rear of the first floor building which I'm pointing to right
now uh one bathroom unit one will also have one bathroom then we get to the third floor I'm sorry
the third unit which is on the second floor which is to the rear of the first
the uh the first apartment with the parting wall and then you have one bedroom one bath
and then you have the third floor which is
in the front of the building you have a studio or a smaller unit and then we have the uh
fourth unit, which is to the rear of the third floor. So that's what we have as far as the actual
layout of the building. Now, apart from the zoning history, it's important to note
that there's a significance on this block, there's a significant history of multifamily units of
three four and five units on this in fact it's 21 multi-family units uh on this particular block
these are all large buildings and that's a part of my exhibit packet but it's 21 of these going
from 5,300, 5,302, 5,304, but it's, again, a total of 21 multifamilies in this era of
not a minimum of three.
It's three, four, and five of this.
So Mr. Harris, Mr. Harris, go back to the plans a minute.
Did you show four units?
I showed five units.
Let's go back to those.
That's okay.
I'll show it.
Hold on, let's go back to the plans again.
Okay, here we go.
It's two on the first floor.
right unit one and unit two then
for the second floor is a unit one is a bi-level so unit one has uh unit one is on the front of
the building for both the first and second floor okay unit three is on the second floor that's
that's to the rear of the property the middle and the rear and then you have unit four which is to
the rear of the third floor the mid and year the rear and then unit five is studio unit okay thank
you how yeah this is just how it's laid out this is how the building has been laid out and you have
two parking places you say there's two parking places in the front okay thank you uh let's get
back okay so apart from the the zoning history and the the use the the use of the of of the
building and what it was we also have the we had our rco meeting uh it was for coordinating rco
RCO meeting. It was four coordinating RCOs. It was four RCOs that were there. There was support
by two of them, 12th Ward and Faith. There was a non-opposition by the third RCO. And there was
in opposition to the by solo and the reason for the opposition was because they didn't feel like
it was financial hardship that they didn't feel like it was hardship however there is significant
hardship because this particular property it's laid out as five units it can't be it would not
be able to be changed to a single family without significant expense. Also, I'd like to note that
as reflected in the support letter, that there was a total of 10 neighbors that were there.
And of the 10 near neighbors that were there, six was in support of it, two were not in opposition,
and it was two that was in opposition uh so there was it was a total of eight which were
non-opposition and two that were in opposition so it's a large majority that uh was in favor
of this particular project so we're just asking uh that in light of the community support
The fact that this building has a significant history of the five family, that there is parking.
We don't think that it's significant, that there would be a significant congestion to the community that this variance be granted.
Are there curb cuts there in the park front?
Let me see here.
Let's get that.
i believe that there is okay yes there is thank you yes there is okay um you want to bring your
client on please yes mr thomas can you raise your hand please so you can be promoted as a
yes participant okay i could you could you state your name and spell please for the court stenographer
Lamont Thomas, L-A-M-O-N-T-H-O-M-A-S.
Do you swear or affirm, tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Okay, Mr. Thomas, so did you hear the representations that I made regarding this particular project to the panel?
And do you adopt the representations that I've made?
Okay. Do you have anything else to add or that's, that's sufficient?
No. Okay.
Questions from the board?
No, Chair.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
Yes, Chair. We have Cheryl Smith.
Hi, Ms. Smith. Could you please state your name and spell for the court stenographer?
Cheryl Smith, C-H-E-R-Y-L-S-M-I-T-H.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Are you a neighbor?
I'm actually represent the 12th Ward RCO.
Okay, that's fine.
Thank you, ma'am.
Perfect.
Okay, so when we had the meeting, they represented that they would be using this for traveling
nurses, and I haven't heard that mentioned at all.
Is that still the situation?
Because the neighbors were very enthusiastic about that.
Yes, that is still, and Mr. Thomas, you know what? I don't want to speak for the owner. I will have Mr. Thomas speak. Mr. Thomas?
Yes, it still will be used for traveling nurses.
okay and you were providing the traveling nurses situation would be i'm sorry be providing shuttles
for the nurses because you know they work long hours and they're unfamiliar with the area
so that was another consideration of the neighbors is that still the situation yes ma'am
okay um as long as those stay as they were represented um you know my letter still stands
thank you is there anyone else in the virtual audience yes chair we have charles richardson
good afternoon mr richardson you've already been sworn
to state your name and proceed charles richardson office of councilwoman cindy bass room 501
Charles Richardson, Office of Councilwoman Cindy Bass, room 508 City Hall.
The councilwoman has no opposition to granting the variance for the five units in following up with Ms. Smith, as long as it is still considered to be a for traveling nurses, because that's what it was represented as.
I'm not sure that we could do a proviso for that. Am I right?
um i don't i don't see how that would be an enforceable proviso no i don't think we could
do that i mean that's an agreement they have with them but we can't make that a proviso charles
got you uh she she is not in opposition to the five units okay thank you very much for calling
in and as usual um is there anyone else in the first audience here we have allison weiss
hi miss weiss how are you please state your name and spell for the court stenographer
yes hi good afternoon allison weiss a double l i s o n w e i s s right solo german yep solo
germantown civic association right do you swear a firm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing
but the truth yes proceed with your comments yes um well first i would like to comment on the curb
cut. That is not actually a curb cut. It is the accessible corner access where they make the
street curb level with the street so people with mobility carts and mobility issues can go up and
down the sidewalk in the streets. So, so that's not really a curb cut. That's a handicap accessibility feature.
Um, and the other thing that the neighbors have been reporting this project for a number of months, because work started prior to any zoning or anything happening.
And this property was used since 1977 as a single-family use.
The previous owner died in 2020, and the property was vacant for some time after that when people noticed there was activity and had been reporting it because they did not see any permits.
and there was a huge dumpster out front and there was a lot of noise and disruption of the
neighborhood. So people were aware of what was going on prior to any notice of this proposal.
And then we did a survey of the properties on the
it would be the west the east side of Wayne Avenue of the variances and the number of units
and we came up with nine that were for three family one single family and two that were four
family. So five family is way in excess of the norm for the street. So for that reason, we would
appreciate consideration for a reduction in the density because the traveling nurse program is
just that. It's traveling. It could end tomorrow and we would still have this variance for five
units and that could be a potential of 10 plus people when the community is used to
basically one or two people there can i respond uh let's see if she's done yet please oh i thought
she was done no no oh miss weiss yes i i see that i see the provisos that you've attached to
right yes you call for interior trash interior mailbox mail storage and maximum three units am
i right yes yes okay thank you very much appreciate it thank you thank you uh is there anyone else in
the virtual audience other than the owner i see no other handshare okay counsel do you want to
respond yeah absolutely so regarding the roof issue i'm sorry regarding work that was being
done there was the only work that has been done on the property there's been no renovations that
you can see that from the inside the only work that was done to the property is that there was
a issue where the roof was in danger of collapsing and i can have my client uh he can testify
he can testify as to that so this that's fine your testimony is fine right okay so
as to that so this that you that's fine your testimony
this was uh just to preserve the integrity the structural integrity of the building
and also i looked at the uh i looked at the same thing my exhibits basically speak for themselves
as far as the number of multifamily, including not only three families, but I'm looking at
there is three. I'm looking at 5308 Wayne Avenue, which is a five unit, which is right down the
street looking at 5316 which is a six unit i'm looking at 5320 which is a five unit i'm looking
at i think i think i think we get your point okay right so it's not this is not i i with all due
respect to solo this is this is not an overuse of this particular property and this is not something
that this is not something that's unprecedented at all, and particularly in light of the fact
that the history has been what it has been for this particular property. Okay. All right. Thank
you. Is there anyone else in the virtual audience? Yes, Chair. We have a calling user number ending
in 1232. Sure. Please unmute yourself and wait for the chair. Hi, could you state your name and
Spell, please, for the court stenographer.
The name is Pamela, P-A-M-E-L-A.
Last name is Bracey, B as in boy, R-A-C-E-Y.
I'm a member of Solow, Germantown.
Oh, good.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Do you have anything different to add than what Ms. Weiss added?
No, I just want to concur with Ms. Weiss.
Okay, and you are comfortable with the provisos that Ms. Weiss named, right?
Okay, thank you for taking the time to call us. We appreciate it.
Is there anyone else in the virtual audience?
I see no other handshare.
Planning Commission.
It's Ron Bednar, City Planning.
The property is indicated for residential use on a city plan.
we have no objection to the granting of the variance provided
the parking encroachment is removed
thank you
so what I'm going to do with this I'm going to hold this to
next week and we will vote at 2 p.m. next Wednesday
And what I want to do is just go through a couple of issues relative to the parking and all and figure out where we stand with that.
OK. So we will vote next Wednesday at 2 p.m.
OK. OK. Thank you very much for your for your for your time and your presentation.
Number five, MI-2022-007-314-1932 Cecil B. Moore Avenue.
Sean Ward is the attorney.
Letter of support from United Neighbors Alliance Civic Association with Unenforceable Provisors.
Mr. Ward.
He's coming back in as a panelist, Chair.
Thank you.
Hi, Mr. Ward, how are you, sir?
I am hanging in there, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you for asking.
I am here on calendar number MI 2022-007314.
We have that.
I represent Lou and Maria Kutsaratas, that is spelled.
Could you, just for the record, could you start with your name and spell for the court snobber?
I'm sorry.
Yeah, Sean, S-H-A-W-N, Ward, W-A-R-D.
On behalf of Lou and Maria Kutsaratas, that is spelled capital K-O-U-T-S-O-U-R-A-D-I-S,
doing business as 88 Group LLC owner and applicant of the subject property at 1932.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
I always do.
Vice Chair has a few questions for you, sir.
Good afternoon, Counselor.
Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Thank you, Ishmael. Yes, I stipulate and waive, and all exhibits have been submitted prior to this hearing. And I do have a letter from RCO United Neighbors.
Thank you, Ishmael.
Yes, I stipulate and waive.
All right, please proceed.
Awesome. Thank you very much.
Mr. Chairman, I am sharing my screen now, if we can confirm that it's visible.
It is, sir.
Oh, that's great. I just saw a little notice on the top said participants can now see your screen.
I was like, I never saw that before. OK, I have submitted my customary and typical exhibit packet on behalf of Lucas Erotus doing business as 88 Group LLC for the subject premises at 1932 Cecil B.
more. This was an application for a permit for a business and professional office on the first
floor front, together with seven residential units at the first floor rear and the three
stories above. It resulted in one refusal due to the fifth district overlay, which limits the
number of units that can be provided due to the square footage of the property. I would note to
the board that this board did grant a variance back in 2014 for three two-bedroom units at the
second, third, and fourth floor level, and we're looking to modify that somewhat. There was a
proviso for a maximum height of 38 feet, with which we currently comply. So accordingly, we do
need a use variance, and we're seeking that from the board today. So that is A1, the notice of
refusal. A2 is the CBA application of appeal. A3 is the PIF, project information form. A4, proof of
ownership, A5 proof of tax plans. A6 is a site plan, A7 are floor plans, A8 are photographs of
posting, subject property, aerial views, and street views. A9 is the RCO letter of support
from United Neighbors Alliance. I would just point out to the board, they submitted their summary
to me, which I included in my packet, but I do have today the explanation letter from the RCO,
which has been previously submitted directly to the board, but we have a copy of that today as
well. I don't have a letter from district council, 5th district, but if it is submitted, I would ask
that that be marked as 810. With regard to the relevant zoning history, in 2016, again, a variance
was granted for the multifamily use and a vacant commercial first floor. Since that time, Lou has
moved his residential, you know, property management office into the first floor front.
So he does have eyes and ears on the street. The first floor rear is where we're looking to add
an additional unit. And I would point out that also back in 1959, this was a two family and a
beauty shop. I would also point out that at A12, I have the zoning history of 1913-19 Cecil B. Moore.
That is Lou and Marie's associated project, which consists of 45 dwelling units contained in three
buildings uh which are similar to what are we are proposing to do with this uh project here
and uh part of that is the floor plans uh a13 is the zoning map a14 or aerial photograph
uh so originally this was built as uh three two-bedroom apartments at the second third
and fourth floor with the vacant commercial at the first um and and what what louis found
is that nobody wants a two-bedroom apartment so you know over time he's converted the three two
bedrooms to six one bedrooms you know each with their own kitchen unit they're fully sprinkled
fire alarms smoke detectors all that good stuff in requirement with the code and then we're looking
at a ground floor unit at the rear behind the commercial use as an additional, you know,
again, a one-bedroom unit, okay?
So six of the seven one-bedroom units are currently occupied.
All tenants are single individuals.
There's no multiple occupancy of any of the units.
Again, these are urban professionals, doctors, students, you know, university.
doctors, students, you know, university employees that, you know, want their own space. And, you
know, so that's that who that is who he's catering to, not only in this building, but at 1913-15-19,
which is, you know, a half a block away. Okay. And again, so no tenants are interested in co-tenants
or roommates uh and again all the all the units are fire code compliant they're fully sprinklered
they got pull stations smoke and fire detectors so uh we have the um yeah the notice of refusal
for 1932 the application of appeal uh the project information form which was submitted
my transmittal letter to the board as you know as usual um they purchased this property back in 2013.
We have our tax clearance, proof of tax clearance. All taxes are paid. Let me go to 21, page 21.
um so if you look at i'm going to turn this hang on one second okay
all right so when you look at the first floor front this is the commercial space that lou now
uses as his uh business office uh for all his rental units located on cecil b more you walk
the front door and you turn immediately to the left and he does a basement access for additional
storage. Walking directly to the rear, this would be the proposed new living unit, which would have
a galley kitchen, a living room area, followed by a bath and a bedroom at the rear. At the second
floor which is typical of the you know second third and fourth uh what had used to be or
originally designed as a two-bedroom unit has been uh you know modified into two uh single bed
units okay so when you come up to the landing you have access to a unit at the rear and you have
access right here to a unit to the front each has its own designated kitchen a living area
a full bath and a bedroom at the front again towards the back when you come in you have your
your living room area your little kitchenette a full bath and a bedroom at the rear okay and
that is typical of the second third and fourth floors okay we posted the property in accordance
with the code. Here's a copy of the poster. Not included in my packet are the photos, but they
were submitted to the board. So here is the poster on the front window, and you can see clearly the
address 1932. We have the summary letter by United Neighbors Alliance, and Mr. Chair and members of
the board, I would point out that with some of my medical conditions or issues that I've been
dealing with. This case has been continued several times, as has the RCO meeting. However, notices
went out on each and every scheduled meeting, despite the fact that we had to continue them
or reschedule them or postpone them on several times. So everybody was well aware of this
application. Submitted directly to the board and not included in my packet, however, I do have a
copy today is the UNACA letter dated August 21 expressing their support for the application
adding that it's a positive addition to the community and I would point out that
Lou and his wife have agreed with UNACA to provide the retractable window fire escape ladders
uh you know as permitted as permitted by the code and i point that out that that's important to lou
and his wife maria because uh they basically lost their home in a fire um you know within the last
year and so they were fully aware of the dangers of a residential fire and and the impacts that
that can have on you know on the residents uh they're in so they uh they are more than willing
to provide those retractable window fire escape ladders over and above what is required by the
code. And so I just thought that was important to point out. Okay. So this is a picture
of the subject property. It's the one in the center. As you can see, you have the, you know,
As you can see, you have the front commercial office use, and then it's three stories above.
the front commercial office use.
This is a Google angle shot showing the subject property.
And again, this is new construction, so it's fully compliant with all the applicable building and occupancy codes.
This is a picture of Cecil B. Moore looking westbound.
As on this corner here, indicated by my cursor, are the three other buildings at 19, 13 through 19 Cecil B. Moore.
This is a picture looking eastbound on Cecil B. Moore, subject property being to our immediate left here in the photograph.
The summary form from United Neighbors indicating support with provisos, nine in support with provisos, two opposed, and the proviso was the fire escape boxes, but like I said, Lou and Maria have agreed with them that they would install them anyway, given their circumstances.
In 2016, again, here is the zoning permit. It allowed the three dwelling units, you know, pursuant to a variance. We're just looking to further restrict those units as opposed to being two-bedroom units to being six one-bedroom units with the addition of one additional one-bedroom unit at the first floor rear.
rear. So again, here's the notice of decision. It was granted with provisos, maximum height of 38
feet. Again, here's a letter from the zoning board indicating that decision.
So this is the, these are the plans that were approved.
okay um and you know i i will tell you that the you know the property in 1913-19
cecil b more uh we went through a hell of blue with ellen i on that property it you know it was
in court we we resolved that to the satisfaction of the city and at this point it is now approved
as a 45 dwelling unit structure consisting of three buildings. And what we're proposing here
today is no different than what we have at those buildings. Each is a one-bedroom single occupancy
unit. And at this point in time, Lou does not have multiple tenants in any unit. Each unit right now
is occupied by one individual, and it's what he's looking for, it's what works best for
him and Maria, and so far, everything's been hunky-dory as far as that occupancy goes.
So we're asking the board today to modify the existing variance from three, basically
two family dwelling units or I mean two two bedroom units to the six one bedroom units
with the addition of an additional one bedroom unit and again he will comply as agreed to provide
the additional collapsible fire escape ladders given his history with his his own residential
home and uh he is now occupying the first floor front as his his own office and uh you know he
caters to the needs and concerns of all of his tenants from that space so okay uh yeah lou is
on the call with me today lou if you can uh as i said that you know raise your hand at the bottom
Senator to screen.
Yes, how you doing?
I'm here.
Hi, could you state your name, please, and spell for the court stenographer?
Likurgos Couturades, L-Y-K-O-U-R-G-O-S.
Last name is Couturades, K-O-U-T-S-O-U-R-A-D-I-S.
Right.
Do you swear for him to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Proceed, counsel.
Thank you, Chair.
Lou, you've heard my representations to the board today?
Yes, I have.
Are they true and correct, to the best of your knowledge and information?
Yes, they are.
And you adopt them as your own testimony?
Absolutely.
And given the requested proviso by United Neighbors, despite the fact that this may or may not be something that the board can enforce, you would proceed with that installation regardless, correct?
Absolutely.
Thank you. Questions from the board? No, Chair. No, Chair. Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
Thank you.
questions from the board no chair no chair
I see no hand. Excuse me, Chair. We have Desiree Hall. Okay. Hi, could you state your name, please, and spell for the court stenographer?
Hi, can you hear me? Yes, could you state your name and spell for the court stenographer, please?
Desiree Hall, D-E-S-I-R-E-E-H-A-L-L.
Right.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Are you a neighbor?
I live in the unit.
Oh, good.
Thank you.
Proceed.
There is, that's actually false.
There's already somebody living on the first floor, and there isn't, like, what they're asking for.
He's only zoned for four units, and he only is accepted for four units in this apartment.
you live you live in 1932 now yes currently right and you're saying there's only four
apartments here right now right he's zoned for four and licensed for four units and
there's already somebody living on the fourth on the on the first floor right i think that's
i think it's why he's here is to try to make it legal did you say i'm sorry i said i think that
The reason he's here is to try to get variances to make it all legal.
So when will everything else be built?
Like the fire escapes, all these other things that are supposed to be built in the apartment?
I think that the fire issues are being worked out with the owner right now.
And I think if you heard, I don't know that the fire issue has anything to do with zoning.
It has to do with safety in the building.
And what we're only looking at today is the zoning issues.
Okay. So, so what, I mean, I'm trying to think, like, I just don't understand how the only reason why this is all happening is because he illegally takes people to court and tries to evict them.
And then this is the only reason why he's having this meeting today at all.
I don't know anything about going to court. I'm only, we're only going to look at today the whole issue relative to whether or not it should be zoned the proper way.
All right.
A couple of questions.
Thank you for taking the kind of call. Mr. Ward, do you want to comment?
Yeah, for Ms. Hall, if she's still on.
Ms. Hall?
Ms. Hall, please unmute yourself.
Can you hear me?
Yeah, Ms. Hall, the attorney wants to respond to you.
Yeah, Ms. Hall, I'm Sean Ward.
I am Lou's zoning attorney.
Just to clarify, you're currently a tenant at 1932?
Yes. And you occupy a one-bedroom unit? Correct. Okay. And what floor are you on?
The fourth floor. Okay. Are you current with all your rents and obligations to the landlord?
Yes. Okay. All right. But you occupy one unit as a single-bedroom
unit, correct? Correct. It's not a two-bedroom unit, right? No. Everything on each floor is
two bedrooms already I mean two unit two unit one bedroom on each on each floor okay and and
and you have uh fire alarms smoke detectors and pull stations and all that other good stuff
correct no we don't have fire alarms it's not a fire alarm okay that's not my understanding but
okay all right thank you thank you is there anyone else in the virtual audience yes chair we have
Dianne Jenkins. Hi, could you state your name, please, and spell for the court sonographer.
Dianne Jenkins, please unmute yourself.
Dianne. Her hand is no longer raised, but. Is there anyone else in the virtual audience?
no hello hi diane could you state your name and spell it please for the course
yes diane jenkins d-i-a-n-e j-e-n-k-i-n-s right do you swear for him to tell the truth
the whole truth nothing but the truth i do um are you a neighbor um i live in a resident
President. Thank you. Please proceed. So, Mr. Ward, you swore on the earth that, well, I'm sorry.
I'm sorry. You did not ask questions. Tanya, I have this. You don't ask Mr. Ward questions.
You're to give testimony, your own testimony. Okay. So, number one is fire alarms, smoke detectors.
They are not in the units. We also had a fire before and we couldn't get out the building.
Um, there's no professional, um, uh, people in the building.
There's no professional people in the building.
Um, again, like the other girl said, she's zoned for four units and it's eight units,
um, with people in it.
Um, also, um, there are roommates on a third floor and, um, there were no postage outside
or anywhere in the building.
We went to every zoning meeting, and we had to learn about these things from online.
Can you hear me?
Yeah, you stopped talking.
I'm sorry.
So there are no two bedrooms on the floors that he's stating.
Um, everybody that's in the, um, in these apartments are single family, except for the
third floor, which has four people, uh, well, and the second floor as well.
Um, there is no letters from him or anyone to us about any of these problems that, that's
been going on.
Um, and.
So, so I, just let me state, we're here today to do zoning.
the problems you may be having with the landlord are the problems we can't
adjust that here we're looking at whether or not we should zone the building the proper way
and that's where we are okay okay yes and well under the city guidelines is not in the square
feet right well that's why he wants a variance that's why he's asking for a variance right but
how how can you do that it's already done well that's what the zoning board has to figure out
okay okay thank you no thank you for taking the time to call in is there anyone else in the
virtual audience no cheer just a little follow-up if i go ahead sean um miss jenkins are you still
uh she's off right sean sean okay uh i i just need lou kucharadis back on just just to answer
two or three questions real quick. Okay. I'm here. All right, Lou. Lou, the two people that
just testified before the board, you're aware that there are tenants in the building? Is that
correct? Yes, they are. Are they current with their rents? Absolutely not. Okay. And they may
or may not be subject to landlord-tenant action
in the city of Philadelphia?
Correct.
And in your best estimation,
the two people that voted no at the community meeting,
would that be those two tenants?
I'm pretty sure yes.
That's all I have, Mr. Chair.
Thank you.
Just to complete something,
definitely a fire alarm.
there's definitely smoke alarms i just had the fire alarm uh inspected two days ago
so everything is up and current okay thanks look sprinkler systems fire alarms everything
all right okay very good commission planning commission
ryan bednar city planning in 2014 the zoning map was amended to cmx2 at this location in
accordance with recommendations from the comprehensive plan. The appellant has not
supported the hardship claim with evidence of unique physical circumstances and condition of
the property. Therefore, the City Planning Commission recommends that the zoning board
deny the variance. Thank you. Mr. Ward, we're going to take this to executive session next
week and have a conversation about it. Thank you, Mr. Chair. We will look to vote next
um wednesday at two o'clock and the records close at this point yeah i would just i would
just submit his argument that uh you know that there's no change in the occupancy the two the
two uh objectors uh are uh non-paying residents uh who are you know well yeah i mean i i the way
i look at it is we're looking about the zoning issue the tenant landlord things are the tenant
Yeah. And again, you know, the, the you know, the, the density is not going to change. It's just the fact that, you know, each tenant will have their own space to, you know, a larger unit that nobody wants a roommate or, you know, the things of that.
All right. All right. Thank you very much. I appreciate it. And I ask that you consider my packet, including the information from 1913-19, which are substantially similar, if not the same.
Thank you very much.
Thank you very much. Is there anyone in the virtual audience whose case has not been called?
Is there anyone in the virtual audience whose case has not been called?
I see no hands, Chair.
Thanks, everyone.
A little later today, but I appreciate what everybody did today, and I think we did get
a lot of cases done, so thanks very much.
Thank you.
Thanks, Chair.
Good job.
Thanks.
Have a good evening, everyone.
Yes, great job, everybody.
LaKeisha are you still there LaKeisha LaKeisha are you still there
Lakeesha, Lakeesha, Lakeesha, are you still there, Lakeesha, are you still there?
Hey, Tom, she's not, but I'm here.
Okay, good.
Here's my problem.
You hear me through the phone and not through the computer.
Is everything, is the meeting shut down completely?
It's not.
It's still recording.
When I shut it down, we're going to get disconnected.
Okay, all right.
So let me get back on.
Hold on.
You're listening.
You're listening to me through my cell phone.
We are, but this is on a recording.
We need to do this offline because this is going to be on the public record.
Okay, I'll wait until I'm offline.
Okay, all right.
You're going to take me offline?
Yeah, I have to shut the whole meeting down because it ended.
Oh, okay.
So can I get back online?
it's not it doesn't work that way
I'll reach out to you
and then we'll figure something out
what you gonna do
call me
I don't have your info I'm gonna
send it to Lakeisha we'll probably reach out
tomorrow but we'll figure
something out for next week
okay good and you can email
me too as well
no problem Tom
thanks a lot
Bye-bye.