ZBA Hearing - July 17, 2024

Please share your screen and start your presentation.

Thank you.

So, as mentioned, this property is 8400 East Roosevelt Boulevard, Purcell D. It was originally

part of a larger assemblage that has since been subdivided off. But this site in particular is

split-zoned RSA 1, RSA 2. It is an oversized lot for the RSA district as well. The site is about

seven and a half acres of currently vacant land, partially wooded with frontage along Roosevelt

Boulevard and access as well along Stroll Street. Here are some site photos to put it into context.

As I mentioned, it's currently vacant and part of the site is occupied by existing trees. We are also

adjacent at this location to an apartment building that was approved for 50 multifamily residential

units by the ZBA in 2021. That's on Parcel C here, as well as the Rehabilitation Center and a

medical arts building that have frontage along Roosevelt Boulevard. And we also back up to

Pennypack Park here as well. This application in particular is proposing a three-story building

for multifamily use. 85 residential multifamily units are proposed in total at this location.

Here are some renderings of the project. In connection with the multifamily use that's

In connection with the multifamily use that's being proposed, we're also proposing adequate parking on site. That's roughly a two to one parking ratio here.

being proposed, we're also proposing adequate parking.

And enhanced landscaping. Part of the refusals that we're requesting include allowing for multifamily use at this location.

And because of its size and the location of the property, it is recommended for rezoning as part of the city's central northeast district plan for rezoning to accommodate for residential higher density and mixed use.

So the proposed use here would be consistent with that plan and also appropriate, given that the size and configuration of this lot is not suited to the single family use that would be otherwise permitted in the district, but instead can provide for additional density.

The existing plantings and trees that are located here do make development of the lot without the removal of certain heritage trees in particular and feasible.

So we are requesting a special exception approval in addition to the variance to allow for us to remove certain heritage trees in connection with the application.

But as you can see, the layout and configuration of this building has been very specifically intended to make sure that we're maximizing our setbacks, particularly from the residential houses that are located along Stroll Street, as well as to make sure that we are maintaining as many of the existing trees and specifically the heritage trees on site as possible.

In addition to maintaining those trees, we're also proposing adequate landscaping that certainly meets the code for the tree replacement requirements related to removing healthy heritage trees from the site.

Here's a copy of our refusal for reference, as I mentioned, variance relief for multifamily

use as well as the special exception from trees as part of our application today.

We did present this project to the Ron Hurst Civic Association, who's the coordinating

RCO on March 20th.

We're happy to say that they have provided a letter of support for this application,

which is included in the packet as well.

And following that meeting, we also presented this application to the Civic Design Review

Committee.

they completed their review on May 7th. This is a copy of their letter concluding the review of

the project. And in connection with that review, we made certain minor changes to the plans

in response to the feedback that we received through CDR. So we are submitting revised plans

that we're asking should the board grant approval that they'd be subject to revised plans to

accommodate some of the changes that were shown at that last CDR meeting. A copy of the proviso

plans is included in our packet as well um and with that i'll say that i'm joined today by our

project architect um as well as our project engineer um as well as ken weinhold from the

dupal group who's here on behalf of the owner if i can ask ken to raise his hand at this time

before we move on to questions i'll ask that he about my testimony and can you please raise your

hand? Kenneth Wenhold has been allowed to speak. Sir, could you please state your name and spell

for the stenographer? Certainly. My name is Kenneth Wenhold, K-E-N-N-E-T-H-W-E-N-H-O-L-D as

and David. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?

I do. Proceed, counsel. Thank you, Ken. Did you hear the statements I made to the board this

afternoon? I did. Are they complete and accurate? They are complete and accurate. Thank you. Would

you adopt them as your own? I would adopt them as my own. Thank you, Ken. With that, we're happy

to take any questions. Show the drawing one more time on what the building is going to look like.

Sure. We have several views. This is the front of the building near the parking lot.

We also have another wider view, and this is the rear area where the amenity space is going to be,

and some existing trees kind of in shadow that we're maintaining as part of the development

council council leave that up so then i'll ask the board it's just easier to look at it and

understand a little bit better questions from the board yeah what was the minute what are the

amenities that will be used for that amenity space this is an outdoor open space area um so there's

outdoor seating provided as well as a patio area that connects to the fitness room um i do like i

said i have our project architect and then there are floor plans as part of our submission if we

want to get into any more detail, we'd be happy to.

Other questions from the board?

We have parking for this development.

Correct.

There's 85 units being proposed and there are 168 parking spaces, which is a little less

than two to one parking ratio on site.

That exceeds what is required by zoning, certainly, but it was important to the community that

there be adequate parking at this location.

And the owner also has experience with the development next door at Lot C and that multifamily building there as well.

So it was important that we maintain that parking ratio to make sure there's adequate parking for residents and their guests.

Thank you.

Other questions from the board?

No, Chair.

No, Chair.

Questions or comments from our attorney, Hilliard Emerson.

Questions or comments from our attorney, Hilliard Emerson?

Not at this time, Mr. Chair.

Questions or comments from the virtual audience?

I see no hands at this time, Chair.

Planning Commission.

Thank you, Chairman, and good afternoon.

David Fechta with the City Planning Commission.

Chairman and Board members, this proposal completed its Civic Design Review in May 2024.

The Civic Design Review Committee's advisory recommendations are not an expression of the City Planning Commission's recommendation or opinion regarding zoning variances, special exceptions, or other discretionary approvals associated with this proposal.

The Comprehensive Plan recommends a change in zoning at this location from RSA1 and RSA2,

Residential Single Family, to RMX1, Residential Mixed Use.

The proposed RMX1 would allow the proposed dwelling units.

The appellant also requests a special exception for removal of heritage trees.

for a special exception of this type the appellant must show that they are replacing

the removed trees in accordance with section 147051 g of the code the appellant has not shown

that they have met this standard the city planning commission recommends that the board grant the

proposed multi-family use but deny the proposed special exception for removal and replacement

of heritage trees council you want to respond yes if i may um so we are meeting all code

requirements for the tree replacement standards. Amanda Albano from Bowler Engineering is here

to answer questions about the tree replacement plan if the board has any questions, but we are

meeting the code requirements for replacing trees. Thank you. So MI 2024-001-168-8400 East

Roosevelt Boulevard, number D. I vote yes with proviso, revised plans, six pages, stamped by ZBA,

July 17th, 2024.

James Snell, my vote is yes with proviso.

Cheryl Gaston, my vote is yes with proviso.

Tannetta Graham, my vote is yes with proviso.

Diane Nguyen, my vote is yes with proviso.

Thank you, counsel.

Thank you.

Number four, MI 2024-001-411-1104 North 42nd Street.

Vernon Anastasio is the attorney.

There's a letter of support from Central Parkside Community Development Corporation.

Councilperson Gauthier has agreed to go along with the decision of the Central Parkside Community Development Corporation as long as it was in writing and is in fact in writing.

Mr. Anastasio is coming in as a panelist.

Good afternoon, Mr. Chair.

Counsel, just state your name for the record.

You've already been sworn.

Vern Anastasio on behalf of Mr. Shulam Teitelbaum.

Do you stipulate to the waiving of the reading and the accuracy of the refusal?

Yes, sir.

And have you had all your documents in within in the last five days?

Yes, sir.

Please proceed. Share your screen.

I'm back, Chair.

Okay, thank you, Ish.

Okay, Mr. Chair, we have a 48-page exhibit binder.

today for 1104 North 42nd Street. It includes an RCO letter of support and some other additional

supporting documents. It's a fairly straightforward proposal on a very large corner property in West

Philadelphia. It's a three-story old Victorian. I'm sorry, that's not true. I take that back.

It's a three-family dwelling in an existing structure at North 42nd Street.

And here are the plans.

As proposed, you'll see the basement is strictly for utilities only.

We've got the first floor being a two-bedroom unit.

And we've got the second floor with a two-bedroom unit, and the third floor with a two-bedroom unit.

Here is some of the streetscape photos.

Here is some of the streetscape.

It's right at the base of the bridge here.

There's the property itself.

Several vacant lots to the right.

One vacant lot that's used for parking on the left.

and other, to the extent that there are

occupied properties on this particular block. It's a mix

of single, double, and three-family dwellings.

Property is in major disrepair and has been

so for quite some time.

This is the RCO notice

and, of course, zoning hearing notice that was mailed to all

appropriate households. And 79 individual addresses were mailed this notice.

group of posting at the property in question

support letter from Centennial Parkside

the market being what it is on this particular block and this

unique location at the base of that bridge

redeveloping this property into a single family home is just it would be unsustainable and just

could not make it work in the marketplace at today's current conditions. And here's an aerial

view of the property in question. Because of the property's unique situation and particular

location because of the various vacancies surrounding the property and because the

market cannot bear a completely rehabbed new single-family home in this particular location

and because we have the community support and the council office affirms that position,

we respectfully request the granting of the variance. Thank you.

Byrne, do you have your client? Yes. Mr. Teitelbaum, if you could please raise your hand.

has been allowed to speak yes sir could you please state your name is spelled for the court

sonographer sulem title bomb s-h-u-l-e-m title bombs t-e-i-t-e-t-e-l-b-a-u-m you swear a firm

to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth yes please proceed counsel thank you

Mr. Teitelbaum, did you hear my presentation to the board this afternoon?

Yes.

Is it true and accurate to the best of your knowledge?

Yes.

You adopted as your own testimony?

Yes.

I have nothing further, Mr. Chair.

On that particular block, I know there's some vacancies.

What are there many multiple family units?

There's at least two other multiple family dwellings on that block.

Thank you.

Questions from the board?

Yes, I have a question.

The lot that you said is used for parking, is that owned by the same person or is that just they're just using it for parking?

Someone is using it for parking. It has nothing to do with us.

And is there any what is there a hardship for providing a duplex instead of a triplex in this particular parcel?

It's a large structure. And as a as a triplex, we're we are providing a two family dwelling.

It's our two, you know, two bedroom apartments. If we were to make this a duplex, they would be even larger.

And we think it would be more difficult to occupy. These are going to be brand new housing units with two bedrooms,

the full going expanding the full floor on each level uh at a more approachable price point and

i we do think that that's probably the best approach in this particular location

as as does the community so what is the outdoor space like for um i think it was the first floor

i guess will be have the yard what was that outdoor space in the yard and can you go to

floor plans so we can see because it's not sure yeah yeah yes i think i even had a

more importantly to your question i have a site plan

uh you have a 26 foot yard

You have a 26-foot yard.

Can you go to the floor plan so we can see?

Sure.

So where's, yeah, zoom in so we can see all three together.

Yeah, yeah.

Where are the, where are the trash kept?

All the trash will be kept within each of the units.

Okay.

And that was per the RCO, exterior lighting per the RCO, security cameras per the RCO, and of course, a management company.

i guess i'm i guess i'm back to kind of the same conversation about the size of the living space

for the units in general i mean you look at this is that the dining room where's the living room

for this third floor unit that says dining kitchen and that's literally a kitchen so

where's where's the living room oh this would be just an open space for a living room dining

that's not only dining that's not that's what the plans are telling us i know but that's

unfortunate because that's you know that's obviously can't work and i know i know we can't

dictate the number of bedrooms for a unit right because that's not zoning but that's not a livable

unit well based on your input if you wanted us to i don't think we can do that proviso well then

And my proviso, my recommendation would be that there are one bedrooms because that's not a two bedroom unit.

Right. I mean, that that's what I was about to say, Mr. Johns.

I don't know that that's the legal. I can't. I don't think we can do that.

Hillary, we can agree to we can agree to anything. Right.