Tiffany, could you put your video on?
No, I'm on the phone.
Okay, good.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Tiffany, do you favor this project or against it?
I'm favoring for this particular project.
The reason being is because of the fact that this particular area lacks the businesses.
A lot of the residents in this area for a long time have had to travel long distance, like the Oregon Avenue, all the way around Grace Ferry, to just shop.
We have a lot of seniors who live in the area and disabled people who, for this particular project, would allow them to shop and not have to travel real far like that, you know, where they've had to travel at this point.
Also, there's only 30 residents, mainly our group has opposed any residential on this side, but because there's only 30 and the developer has agreed to participate in the Philadelphia Voucher Program, which we hope to have more communication with them about that, we think that that is a good thing because we do need people who are of a lower income, well, income, you know, need help with their income to have places where they can live at.
And also we're hoping that to have further communication, like Mr. Littlepage said, to also maybe to connect them with maybe the African American Business Association and Black Enterprise for businesses, minority businesses who might want to participate once the construction is over with.
So that's why we see this as a positive project on Point Bree's side.
I just want to say for the record that we fought very hard against the IRMX zoning, doing the zoning code, because we know that we turn into a buy-write, and it's important for people to have voices on this particular side, since we were not invited to any of those talks regarding the – I'm sorry.
Well, you know, we weren't invited to those particular bills, meetings regarding RMX for 25th and 24th, as well as Broad Street.
So we think at this particular point, you know, that's a point that we wanted to make.
OK, Tiffany, thank you for calling. We appreciate it.
One more hand left. Two.
Yes, Chair, we have Madeline Shacombo.
Hi, could you please state your name and unmute yourself, please?
Okay, could you please state your name and spell for the stenographer?
My name is Madeline, M-A-D-E-L-I-N-E, Shikumba, S-H-I-K-O-M-B-A.
Hold on, hold on one minute.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Please proceed.
My name is Madeline Shikumba.
I'm president of the North of Washington Avenue Coalition.
We are on the northern side of Washington Avenue.
We fully support this project.
Oh, thank you.
We feel as though that this project is necessary.
We have been fighting against these thaw buildings that have been blocking people's light on our side, but they've been successful in getting it passed.
We like the design.
We like the fact that she's bringing in jobs.
Most of the jobs brought on our side are on the market, supermarkets, and nothing else.
We have now a project that we're fighting to maintain as an I-2, which is at 16th and 01 Washington Avenue.
The developer doesn't really want to build I-2 there.
He prefers to put more apartment buildings.
We are tired of apartment buildings.
They do not bring jobs.
We need jobs.
We need jobs, and we keep telling them that we want jobs.
And we keep telling them that we want jobs.
I am the co-
I am the co-coordinator on the northern side of Western Avenue.
We share the position of coordinator with SOSNA.
As I pointed out in the past, SOSNA is more influenced by development
than they are influencing, as far as we are concerned, protecting the neighborhood.
We are fighting this one on the I2.
will be fighting for its existence
as opposed to the developer who is
fighting not to really build it.
Okay, so we are opposed
to it. And also, as far as Washington Avenue,
we like the idea. We
fought to keep Washington Avenue
Washington Avenue. We did not want all
these bike lanes and stuff on Washington Avenue
because it
interferes with what Washington Avenue
was originally designed for, and that was
for I2 and businesses.
We're not required for pedestrian.
I mean, they got the other streets to go to.
Why do they got the other streets to go to?
Ms. Shacumba, we understand where you stand,
and we appreciate very much you calling us,
and we're taking everything you said into consideration.
Last hand, please.
I have a...
I see no more hands, Chair.
What's that?
I see no...
Wait a minute, Chair.
Mr. Mationi, could you wrap up quickly some of the things you heard
and where you stand?
Certainly.
with respect to the parking lot and we met with streets department streets department approved
the two means of ingress and egress on washington avenue the other street that it fronts on is 25th
street we already have the loading coming in and off of 25th street the trash is picked up off of
25th street which was a second question so the streets department determined that we needed to
have two rather than one means of ingress and egress on washington avenue and that's for public
safety they said we asked about only having one and they said if you only have one that's not
adequate for fire and other emergency vehicles to get into the site so we needed to have two and
they said they have to be on washington avenue 25th street's not wide enough and it already has
conflict with the loading being off of 25th street and the trash being picked up off of
25th street so that's why we have the curb cuts on washington avenue that's what streets department
recommended that we do um with uh and i believe those were the big comments you mentioned trash
to me yeah trash is also at the same place the loaning spaces are okay good great yes all right
thank you planning commission thank you chairman and good afternoon david pecto with the city
planning commission chairman and board members the comprehensive plan recommends a change in zoning
at this location from I2, medium industrial, to IRMX, industrial and residential mixed use.
The zoning for this part of Washington Avenue dates to 1985. IRMX would allow the proposed
uses without a variance, and the proposed uses match the character of other recently built
developments on Washington Avenue. The City Planning Commission recommends the board grant
proposed use variances for multifamily dwellings, retail sales of food, beverages, and groceries,
sit-down restaurants, and uses as allowed in CMX3, commercial mixed use, and the proposed
off-street loading variance. Thank you. MI 2024-006-879-2400 Washington Avenue, I vote yes.
Michael Johns, my vote is yes. Cheryl Gaston, my vote is yes. Tanetta Graham, my vote is yes.
ION my vote is yes
Ishmael Shaheed my vote is yes
Thank you
Thank you
Yeah I'm going to go
I'm going to go to number one
MI 2024
005 266
1201 Unruh Avenue
Alan Nockmson is the attorney
Thank you
Good afternoon, Mr. Chair.
also could you please state your name and spell for the stenographer yes alan knockamson a-l-a-n
last name knockamson n-o-c-h-u-m-s-o-n do you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth
nothing but the truth i do could you identify your client the relationship to this property
uh yes my client is 12 oh excuse me my client is sharon johnson um i'm going to refer you to
um i'm going to refer you to our vice chair but my understanding of this case after talking to
or a vice chair, but my understanding of this case.
our council this will be here and hold that is correct we need to do an amended refusal based
on the parking changes as part of the project all right our place chair has a few questions
council do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and whisper to his accuracy i do have you
emailed in all the required documents and or exhibits to proceed with this case five days in
advance yes we have thank you all right share the screen
all right so this is 1201 unruh avenue uh this is a corner property um currently legally being
used as a duplex it has a history of being a duplex plus some commercial use i think as
the last commercial use was some type of office ultimately like what we're trying to do today
after much uh reflection by my client is merely to swap that previous commercial space into a
residential space to make this a triplex so it took us a while to get here and um i believe that
the community comments really pushed my client in the right direction so during our presentation
will first review the notice of refusal, then we originally had a proviso form in here to
try to, you know, get us to a vote today, but I agree with counsel that this is probably
more appropriate to have amended refusal and we'll seek authorization from the zoning
board after today, and then the board will vote after that we have received that amended
refusal.
But it's good to have the proviso form in here because it explains some of the modifications
we're proposing as part of the project today.
We have correspondence from the Community on the Rise group.
That was a coordinating RCO.
It's a letter of opposition, unanimous opposition,
but it was for a different type of project.
We did try to meet with the group
after we made these modifications,
which I think are more reasonable in nature
and should be approved by this board.
But I just want to let you know,
we did try to have another community meeting
to kind of show them how we're changing the project.
Then we have the property history.
Again, you're going to see that this property has multifamily use currently as a duplex,
but it also has that third unit there, which we're merely looking to swap out.
Then maps of the area.
Again, we're a corner property.
So even though we're an RSA 5 property, you'll see that we're not out of character to its
previous use and hopefully future use.
uh then photographs of the property in the surrounding area um our original plans and
drawings my client tried to be very ambitious with this project um the community looked at it
and said no and i would happen to agree that that ambition was a little bit misplaced um and you
know they're definitely downgrading that use and i think a triplex is more for the appropriate use
under the circumstances we're not increasing the amount of units we're just swapping out that
commercial space for residential space, which makes sense under the circumstances. Our RCO
meeting notice. So we did have a pre-community meeting with the community. They had a site
visit. Don't know why this happened, but my client, for whatever reason, didn't let them
into the property. But there's nothing to hide. It's just, I guess maybe there were tenants in
there. He didn't want them in there. I don't know why. We did have one community meeting,
which was very well attended, and they expressed their opposition to have what was originally
the proposal was three residential units and two commercial spaces, and then basically expanding
that building structure in a way which was out of character with the neighborhood. Again,
we tried to get another community meeting when we talked to our client and stated a more reasonable
use would be three-family dwelling. Our application for appeal that we filed on Sharon's behalf,
our deed to the property showing that she owns the property, and then our certificate of tax
clearance showing that she's in good standing with the city of Philadelphia regarding her real
estate taxes. So notice the refusal. This is a lot to digest here. By doing the modifications
to the project. The only refusal we have left is three family dwelling in that we're an RSA 5
property. But again, if you look on the public record, there's a rental license for two residential
units. So we're not going from one to three, we're going from two to three. And again, that third
unit was previously in office. So, and again, that third unit is completely above grade. They have,
we actually introduced more windows to the, to the, to the residential space to make sure they
have light in there but the entrances are separate and above grade uh so again you know mindful of
Uh, so again, you know, mindful of, of that and then our proviso form.
of that and then
So this again, it's just a cheat sheet of how we changed the project.
We removed the front side and rear additions again, out of character to the neighborhood
where my client was proposing.
Um, we increased the gross floor area of the first floor dwelling units.
Originally, um, the, well, two, there was a two car garage there in the rear.
and my client eliminated that two-car garage and what they're proposing to do is put two parking
pads in front of that there's a curb existing curb cut already there and just so you understand
we're not having an entrance where those that garage is if that's another form of egress with
two doors where we added windows there's a side entrance which was where the commercial entrance
was before. So that's, you know, so we have actually three forms of egress for that additional
unit. We removed the one interior accessory parking space. Actually, there was two. This is
going to be the second amendment of this project. And then we added one accessory surface parking
space in the rear. Really two, you'll see. And then this is our revised plan. Again, we'll make
that submission separately to L&I. We'll get an amended refusal. You'll see one refusal, which
has to do with the three-family living. And then here are the parking pads. They are, as of right,
for compact parking, 16 feet by eight feet, two of them. And then you can see here from, you know,
the community input of when my client was trying to put three-family dwelling and two commercial