and described in accordance with a consolidation plan of the property made february 28 2017
by Euron Surveying and Mapping, LLC, as follows to WIT.
Are you familiar with the 2017 consolidation plan?
I believe I am, yes.
Has that consolidation plan been approved?
I'm not certain.
At this point, I'm going to object, Mr. Chairman, how is this relevant in any way?
It certainly is a record document.
It's a copy of the 2018 deed to the zoning applicant, zoning appellate in this case.
It references a consolidation plan, and certainly whether this lot has already been consolidated with another adjacent lot is certainly relevant to whether this remains a separate building lot.
Mr. DeMarco, I'm going to let him ask the question, but I don't know that he seems to know the answer anyway.
Right, exactly. It's not relevant to it. Go ahead.
i'm i'm not certain whether juron surveying and mapping llc had gotten the consolidation approved
or not did you take into consideration the existence of the consolidation plan when drafting
either your zoning earth moving or steep slope analysis we took into consideration the existing
conditions plan that was provided to us did you do any research into prior uses of 301
Delmar F? Objection to relevance.
I'm going to let him answer the question. I'm not certain
at this time. I want to draw your attention to
the second-to-last paragraph of the 2018
Meets and Bounds description of 301 Delmar.
Being part of the same premises with which
William Winokur and Esther, his wife,
by deed dated September 22, 1870, and recorded May 25, 1872, in deed book JAH 253, page 120,
conveyed unto John Connor. Are you familiar of any use made of the property by John Connor?
Objection. How could he possibly know? Where are we going with this? I mean, come on.
Mr. Berkman, he's asking for a reasonable use. This is a property.
Well, so I think what he wants to know, was there any other use of this property? Am I right, Mr. Turner?
Okay. If you know, Mr.
I do not know the answer to that question, Mr. Turner.
Okay. Were you asked to consider any other uses for 301 Del Mar other than the single family home that's included and depicted within your zoning?
other than the single-family home that's included and depicted within your zoning plan,
your steep slope analysis, and your earth moving plan? Negative.
Mr. Sheraton, are you familiar with a
The order to comply by agreement dated July 16, 2019, between the City of Philadelphia and Adva Epstein.
Objection. Relevance?
How could he possibly know about that?
Mr. Bergman, this is an order to comply violations that was entered in City of Philadelphia v. Epstein at docket number 2019, number 03737.
Mr. Turner, answer that to the best of your ability.
No, I am not aware of that document, Mr. Turner.
The record reflect, I'm going to show the witness what we've pre-marked as Exhibit 3.
so I have a feeling that Mr. Turner is going to proceed with something that is utterly irrelevant
to these proceedings he's going to put information before the board about an enforcement case which
was which we is ongoing and on appeal and is a subject of a different litigation that has nothing
to do with the hardship to the property the physical hardship my client's been subject to
uh excessive an excessive fine with regard to this a default initially was a default judgment
there's ongoing litigation so it's just not not relevant to this case it's about the hardship
here's here's the thing he's shown it to him and if he doesn't know anything about it he doesn't
know anything about it i mean i think very well that question very well but note my objection
Mr. Chair. Okay. Mr. Chardon, first of all, do you see the document that we've now shared on
the Zoom screen and marked as Exhibit 3? Yes, I do see the document. I represent to you,
it's an opinion from the Philadelphia Court of Con, please, dated April 20, 2023. Have you ever
seen this document before? Negative, sir. I won't ask you any questions about a document you haven't
seen before, but I want to direct your attention to some of the exhibits that were included within
this document. And for the record, we've pre-marked this document as Intervenor Exhibit 3 and its big
number at the bottom center, beginning at 3-001. I want to direct your attention to-
Mr. Chairman, note my objection. He doesn't know this document. He's never seen it before.
He can't comment on any attachments. So I could be wrong. I think the question is,
He wants to show them things that were put in the document.
Did he know those things?
Correct.
Same objection, though.
Okay, I hear your objection.
Mr. Sheraton, let the record reflect.
I've shared on my Zoom screen, Intervenor 3-018.
Does this refresh your recollection as to whether you've seen the order to comply violations by agreement?
No, sir. I have not seen this document before, to my knowledge.
Okay. Let me direct your attention to the second page, which is Exhibit 3-019. And I'm going to identify certain requirements imposed by this order. And I want to know whether you're familiar with those requirements and whether those requirements have actually been met.
the first let me eject again mr chairman mr toner i understand cloud sorry mr chairman
mr chairman mr mr toner stated that he understood that i hadn't seen the document
before and he wasn't going to ask me questions about the specific document itself but these
are questions about the specific document itself you're mr chardon if you can't answer the question
don't answer the question yes sir excuse me excuse me this is Hillary I just had a question
um Mr. Toner is there anything in this document that has to um that is relevant to the development
of the property as opposed to addressing existing violations at the vacant property yes and I'm
getting to that right now Hillary so the first agreement part of the order by agreement that
It was signed by the owner of the property provides that the owner shall refrain from further work unless a water management plan is submitted to and approved by the water department and licenses and inspection.
So this let me do an objection. Mr. Toner is trying to confuse this board by citing orders that were entered that are currently under appeal.
by citing orders that were entered that are currently under appeal he does not know the full
extent of what went on in the court of common pleas he's trying to cherry pick certain orders
that are under that are tested explain what you're trying to do yeah so um there was an agreement
reached by the owners property that they would prepare a water management plan and have it
approved by both the Water Department and L&I. They're asking for variances from the steep slope
requirement. This requirement that they submit a stormwater management plan is directly related
to the steep slope area and whether anything can be properly and safely developed on the steep
slope area. And since this was an order of the court that the owner herself agreed to,
So this is certainly part of what should be expected by this board in terms of, is the owner proceeding in a matter that's intended to protect the public safety and welfare?
But, Mr. Jonah, the question is, the issue is, did he have anything to do or did he know anything about this?
And I think he's already answered that.
Yeah, and I just want to know if he's aware of the requirement that they prepare a water match.
I need to be heard eventually on this.
He's absolutely mischaracterizing what went on in the court.
I need to put something on the record, Mr. Jim.
I'll be brief. You can put it on the record, but I think he can answer the question. If he doesn't
know, he doesn't know. I just want to tell you, the owner was given two options on how to comply
the violation, one of which is to go through this process to get a variance. I got it. I got it. Okay.
All right. Mr. Tony, your question is? Yes. Mr. Sheraton, are you aware of the requirement that
the owner have a stormwater management plan approved by the water department no i'm not
aware of this requirement but i would like to state for the record short of the approval by
the water department we meet like if you if you reference the earth moving plan we still meet
what they're even asking here you'll i would point your i would point your attention to the
cfs pink line type along the curb line that stands for compost filter sock and i believe
that that's what they're referring to in but mr sheridan you just testified that you weren't
familiar with this document and you weren't familiar with its requirements so how do you
know what the the parties believed or understood to be the requirements objection that's not reading
that i'm reading what's in front of me mr toner so mr sheridan let me just simply ask you
Is there a stormwater management plan within your records that has been approved by the water department?
Governor, how much longer do you need with Mr. Sheridan?
Not much, Mr. Sheridan.
Mr. Bergman.
actually i i have no further questions for us thank you mr demarco uh
other witnesses well briefly a redirect okay do the redirect and then i think we're going to
resume have a result of hearing for this because all right whatever yeah whatever
I have eight, nine more cases.
I understand.
I understand.
Thank you.
My question for Mr. Sheridan is, is the stormwater management plan, please stop the screen share, Mr. Toner.
Thank you.
Mr. Sheridan, is the stormwater management plan required for this property under current regulations that you're familiar with?
No, not to my knowledge, sir.
And if you were to have developed, pursuant to some of the questioning by Mr. Toner, if you were, I'm going to put the site plan back up on the screen. If you were to have developed a smaller house, would that avoid rear yard, front yard, and side porch variances?
Objection. This calls for speculation. The witness on cross that he didn't consider or was asked to prepare any other.
Mr. Chowder, Mr. Chowder, Mr. Chowder, we're going to let him answer the question.
My final question.
You understand, you understand the question, Mr. Chowder?
Can you repeat it, please?
Yeah, if you were to have designed a smaller structure for this home, would you have been able to avoid rear or front yard setback variances?
Objection.
Well, we would not have designed the house. If we would have received plans for a smaller house, it would have had to have been a much smaller house in order to comply with those requirements.
Can you build a functional house if you complied with the front yard and rear yard setback on this property?
Can you build a functional house if you complied with the front yard and rear yard?
Objection.
Go ahead. Answer that, Mr. Chairman.
To my knowledge, no.
That's all I have, Mr. Chairman.
Okay. So, Mr. DeMarco, how many more witnesses do you have?
I have the owner, Adva Epstein, and that's all I have.
Why don't we do the owner just to adopt your testimony?
is that your testimony she can but i did want her to expound on a couple things
we can do that another here i think what we're going to do is we're going to have a result that's
fine that's fine all right yeah if you could if i could just ask for the hearing to be held as
soon as possible uh we will gladly try to get this in back as soon as possible okay thank you
and thank you i understand yeah okay thank you mr chair we mr chair we do have a date for the
resumption hearing well let's hear the date thank you december 19th at 9 30
all right thank you again december 19th at 9 30
number six mi 2023 004 799 1101 to 53 chestnut street stephanie box magnet is the attorney
a letter of non-opposition from council member squilla letter of non-opposition from washington
square west civic association our commission approval for sign already received
thank you counsel did i swear you before or did we just stop all right why don't you state your
name and spell for the record sure stephanie magna m-a-g-a-g-n-a um claire harrison harvey
Brandsburg, 1835 Market Street, Suite 1400, Philadelphia PA 19123. You swear a firm to tell
the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? Yes, I do. Could you identify your client
and relationship to the property? Yes, I am here on behalf of Thomas Jefferson University, who is
the ground lessee for this property, as well as National Real Estate Development, who is the
developer for the project. Our vice chair has just a few questions. Thank you. Good afternoon,
council do you agree to raise the reading of the refusal no i do not um the refusal has a typo on
it um notes the proposed height of our sign is 87 feet seven inches above the ground it is 37 feet
and seven inches above the ground so there is a typo there um also i'll note this sign is proposed
along chestnut walk which is a private pedestrian pathway um street between the eastern portion
development site of this lot and the western portion development of this lot so it is a private
street and it's interior to the lot so we don't believe that we require a zoning permit for the
proposed sign because this is an interior portion of the property however in the alternative we
are seeking the requested variance for the sign as listed on the refusal.
Understood. Have you emailed in all the required documents that's needed to proceed with this
Yes, I have.
Thank you.
Thank you.
I'm going to share my screen.
So this site is 1101 Chestnut Street.
It is the location of the new specialty care pavilion, which will be named the Honigman Center for Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson University.
The construction is nearly complete at the site.
These are some existing site photos of the exterior grounds that are here.
and you can see we have some interior pictures as well
that kind of show where we are in the process.
We are nearing opening of the facility,
which is very exciting,
and are in the final stages
of getting our accessory signage approved.
So most of the accessory signage here
was approved last year, composed by Wright,
submitted collectively along with the sign
that's before you today to the Art Commission.
We do have a letter of approval
from the Art Commission back in 2022
that's included in the packet for the design of this sign as well.
This sign is the last of what's being proposed. It is a wall sign, what has been deemed as a
building ID sign along the property that's facing the west elevation, facing South 12th Street and
Chestnut Street. It's located near the entrances for that building and identify,
I serve to identify this building and specifically the Hanukkah Center for pedestrians that are
traveling along that chestnut walk pedestrian pathway along the building that connects the
project to the rest of Market East, as well as currently with the second phase of development
on the eastern portion of this site, or I'm sorry, western portion of this site, kind
to be, or I'm sorry, western portion of this site, kind of later for a phase two, undeveloped,
of later for a phase two.
this sign will face Chestnut Street and South 12th Street. So it's been designed to be appropriate,
not only with the existing signage package that exists with TGU campus, but also to allow way
finding for pedestrians traveling along the pedestrian path, in addition to visitors and