oh right we are we are totally opposed to a residential building going up on that line okay
all right that makes it thank you all right thank you very much thank you
all right anyone else new and different there are no more hands at this time chair
planning commission good evening david fecto philadelphia city planning commission
Mr. Chairman, members of the board, the comprehensive plan recommends residential multifamily use
for this property. The city rezoned the property from residential multifamily to industrial
commercial mixed use in 2017 to enable the Gideon School to become one of the mayor's
community schools. And community schools were areas where the private sector would be able
to provide services to the community. We erroneously believe that this property was part of the
adjacent school therefore we do not object to granting this variance a little confused on that
what was that again about the mayor sure so the so we had rezoned this property because
private sector services cannot be provided in a public school we had been asked to rezone
this property to industrial commercial mixed use when we did we unfortunately thought that this lot
actually was part of the Gideon School, which it turns out it's not. And so we probably should
have left it zoned RM1. That's why we're saying we don't object to granting this variance for
multifamily. Okay, all right, more confusion. Excuse me, can I say something? Briefly.
This is Louise Branch. It was industrial and you thought that it was residential for the school,
so you switched it to industrial no it was is residentially zoned before to be able to get
private services into the school as part of the mayor's community schools initiative we rezoned
the block to industrial commercial mixed use that was the classification that would allow
private services to be provided in the school so that's that's why the property switched to
an industrial use classification but it was a residential multi-family classification before
2017 so so david just to clarify had you realized that this lot was not connected with the school
you would have not remapped this lot to icmx is that that is that is correct okay that's that was
my understanding thank you um is miss jones still on hello is mary jones still on miss branch i
muted you for a reason is miss jones still on yes chairman i believe she is
yeah miss jones uh i i i did you just hear the most recent uh uh testimony on behalf of the uh
Yeah, Mr.
zoning board i'm sorry the planning commission um i did hear that i wasn't aware but i
but the information i'm getting now is that that it's an accurate that they that they included
that lot on purpose but unfortunately i don't have direct knowledge of the of what happened
when they re-zoned it prior previously because um again their recommendation is is residential
and i'm wondering if that might change some of the mindset if it was zoned residential
i think what the yeah i think what the chairman is asking mary is that had
and i and i spoke to mary about this and had asked if she thought it would be valuable to have
the planning commission david facto in particular because david and i have talked about this project
for quite some time to to speak at the community meeting to explain this to the community because
sometimes that tends to land better than if it comes from me or the property owner um she had
said that she didn't want that unless the community um had uh requested that and i think you heard
from miss branch that if even if that was shared that it's not going to change the community's
desire to have nothing be here so i i is the question mr chair that would the council office
did the council office know that or would they think of it differently or yeah that's right yeah
oh okay um okay so i'm sorry yeah if you can't answer it now i'm not trying to box you in here
just a little taken back by the testimony on behalf of the planning commission right um so again um
i just am getting information about that well that the zoning was purposeful the icmx um but
that is the perspective of someone from our office and so it could just be you know two different
memories of what happened, but that's from our perspective. The zoning of the ICMX was purposeful
or they were fine with keeping it that way. And, you know, maybe the planning commission did,
you know, has this recommendation that it should be residential, but at any rate,
um it is what it is we are still you know supportive of the community um and
uh and and just you know in their if you can understand their position in terms of
the context and the density okay thank you thank you anyone else uh think i already asked the
planning commission uh any further questions from the board no no okay mi 2020-001 i'm sorry mi
2020-0001612839 west glenwood my vote is no my vote is no my vote is no
my vote is no
calendar number uh 3133 4200 monument road
meredith ferlinger is the attorney
meredith you've been promoted to panelists
Hi, Meredith. Hi, Meredith. Can you put your name and address on the record, please, and spell your last name?
Hi, it bounced me out, so I rejoined.
Okay, name and address, please.
Hi, Meredith Froeliger, F-E-R-L-E-G-E-R, 1500 Market Street, Suite 3500E.
do you swear a firm to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth i certainly do do you agree
to wave and stip i sure do have you emailed an exhibit packet with uh ownership tax compliance
refusal referral photos and or plans five days in advance of this hearing and have you met with
the rco and do you have a letter yes to all of the above thank you you may proceed okay my word
Myrna, before you begin, do you have a letter from the RCO you said, is it opposition or?
It is. It's non-opposition. Can you see it up on the screen? My Zoom image.
it's non-opposition can you see it up on the screen um my zoom image it might be just me i
don't have anything on my screen i something just happened to my screen good in any event you is so
the community yeah it's in non-opposition so um let me finish let me finish i'm gonna try to make
this easy for all of us uh a letter from the district council person um we don't have a letter
but they were in attendance at the meeting, and I believe that they are in non-opposition as well.
Okay, so with that, if you could summarize, get everything on the record that you necessarily need, we can proceed.
I will be very quick because it's telling me my Zoom meetings is not responding,
and if I hit close, I'm going to get bounced.
So hopefully it will at least let me get through the explanation here.
This is simply for signage concerning the recently re-envisioned Belmont Behavioral Hospital.
The photographs that I was hoping to show you, you would see the almost completed new hospital
building that is for new six-story inpatient facility. Property itself is zoned CMX3 and
And based on the zoning code would only permit two freestanding signs based on the number of buildings on the lot.
They are proposing four freestanding signs.
So, of course, one at each entrance, as well as a sign at the corner of Monument and Ford Road.
The one other refusal that we have is related to Belmont's logo sign on the six-story building.
that sign would be prohibited above the second floor windowsill. So it's one of those somewhat
odd signage variance cases that if this sign were a few stories lower, you wouldn't see it,
but it would be permitted. So of course, that is the basis for why we are here. I have a full
presentation. So if you need it, I'd be happy to jump out and jump back in.
just hold on uh i'm going to ask the board did we need any does the board have any questions
no i have no questions is there anyone else who would like to speak on this uh on this case
there are no hands at this time chair thank you planning commission
good evening david facto city planning commission mr chairman members of the board the comprehensive
plan recommends this property for institutional use we have no objection to granting these
variances. Thank you. MI 2020-0031334200 Monument Road. My vote is yes. My vote is yes. My vote
is yes. My vote is yes. Thank you. Thank you, everybody. Thank you. Calendar number 3117-4925.
I'm sorry. I'm sorry. Meredith, your screen is kind of locked. Can you try to remove it on your end?
it looks like meredith is locked if we take her back to be an attendee it'll automatically go off
i changed her back to an attendee
um pauline can you do anything when you're in here we go thank you here we go okay calendar
number 3117 4925 north 5th street burn anastasios the attorney
on the oath from earlier thanks frank
verne has been promoted to panelists verne can you hear me
i can hear you okay name and address please
verne anastasio 1315 walnut suite 1006 philadelphia pa 19107
you're already under oath have you emailed the exhibit packet with all the required documents
you know what they are i have you may proceed thanks and i wave and stip and you do wave and
step mr anastasio i'll ask you the same question do you have a letter from the rco
yeah we're going to do real quick mr chairman uh is the letter in is the letter in how is the
letter is it not in non-opposition it's in non-opposition it's for this is an application
for a pharmacy here's all right here's yet here's the
uh here's all right here's the uh here's the uh sales area the checkout the prep area of the
office uh it's basically a uh commercial corridor to begin with so it's uh we're not asking for
anything crazy and as you can see here that that's where the property is and i'm going to go right
down to the letter from the new 42nd Ward Executive Committee, RCO, a letter of support.
They believe the business will be a great personal touch to customers, would be a positive
for the community, and they support our growth.
And as a result, I'm asking that you vote yes, and I'm going to keep it at that.
My client is here, Mike Patel.
Mike, can you raise your hand so we can get you on the record?
Mr. Patel, you can unmute yourself and speak.
Good evening, sir.
Please identify yourself for the record.
Spell your last name.
Mike Patel.
Thanks, Mike.
Can you spell your last name?
P-A-T-E-L.
We're in a firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Please proceed, Mr. Anastasio.
Thank you, Mr. DiCicco, Chairman DiCicco.
Mr. Patel, did you hear my presentation to the board?
Is it true and accurate to the best of your knowledge?
And do you adopt it as your testimony?
Yes, I do.
That's it. I rest.
Questions from the board?
Planning, I'm sorry, anyone else would like to testify in this case, please raise your hand.
Chair, Mr. Richardson is here.
Mr. Richardson, you can unmute yourself and speak.
Mr. Richardson, they're still under oath.
Please identify yourself for the record.
Charles Richardson, Office of Councilwoman Cindy Bass from 312 City Hall.
Councilwoman has no opposition to granting this variance.
And good night, everybody.
Good night.
Stay safe.
MI 2020-003117, 4925 North 5th Street.
My vote is yes.
My vote is yes.
My vote is yes.
my vote is yes thank you i think we go to number 13 carol yes yes we do thank you all for a very
long evening calendar number 3135 615 south third street the attorney is david orphanetes
we have support from the rco and councilman squilla is not opposed with a proviso
Thank you.
Mr. Orphanides, you've been promoted to panelists.
David, can you put your name and address on the record, please?
David, can you put your name and address on the record?
Yes. Can you hear me now?
Okay, great.
David Orphanides, Orphanides & Toner, 2 Penn Center, 1500 John F. Kennedy Boulevard,
suite 800 philadelphia pennsylvania 19102 on behalf thank you i'll see the owner of the
subject property do you swear if i'm to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth
i do do you agree to wave and stip i agree to wave and i cannot stipulate there was a minor
okay and you'll explain that have you emailed the exhibit packet with the required documents
yes you may proceed mr orphanetes i know that there's a letter of non-opposition
both from the rco and councilman squilla's office uh with a proviso uh as you know we take all these
cases seriously but in the interest of time if you could summarize whatever it is you need on
the record then we can get this voted out quickly sure may i just share my screen quickly please
can you see my screen now yes okay great um and and just to clarify this is sharon
hello i'm sorry mr orfinis can you confirm that all the requested provisos are included in the
revised plan no i can't um so the coordinating rco which has which letters letter is included
with our package at tab two, do not have any provisors.
The other, there's one other RCO with jurisdiction
over this property, which is not the coordinating RCO,
which is Queen Village Neighbors Association.
They provided their letter after Friday,
which was the deadline to submit,
which on the 8th, I believe.
And in their letter, their one proviso
as a basis for the support, again,
a basis for the support. Again, the coordinating RCO supports, and you can see that
the coordinating RCO supports and you can see that
right here at tab, excuse me one second, tab two,
February 5th, and you can see the summary. We made a number of revisions to the design,
eliminated rear yard depth refusal, lowered the height of the pilot houses,
uh redesigned the whole ground floor front facade based upon the email that we had received from
uh the coordinating rco which copied the um the other rco queenville's neighbors association
if you can see there's no reference to a proviso in the letter from the coordinating rco south
street head house district um the the letter that came in afterwards um from
from uh queen village had the proviso that i'm showing on the screen right now regarding the
front ground floor front the side has nothing to do with zoning and they wanted there's there's
ground floor commercial non-residential and then there's residential units above we don't have any
use refusal here um ground floor is vacant non-residential commercial right now because