His parents actually still live in the neighborhood.
And he thought this was a great opportunity as an investment, but also to, you know, be able to move back in the neighborhood.
So we met with the community.
The biggest, you know, negative in terms of their mind is that this part of the district was remapped or rezoned at the end of the year.
and they felt like it was a waste of their time if basically we were able to get a variance
even though this is an RSA-5 property.
And I explained to them that they didn't want to create precedent.
And we really tried to explain to them that this is a unique circumstance
because based on what we reviewed, based on Atlas and based on the MLS listing,
At the time we purchased the property, everything stated was RM1.
You know, unfortunately, the city's, you know, website, especially atlas.philo.gov, the OPA,
there's a delay sometimes in the changeover from when the zoning classification change.
And this is one of these circumstances.
And we would not be creating precedent because if we hypothetically did it right now, it
shows on the city's website, it's RSA5, right?
But we're not creating precedent in that way.
And, you know, we stated that, you know, again, we didn't state that to them in the community meeting, but for purposes of the legal argument, there's a doctrine called vested rights, right, where if we detrimentally rely on representations made by the city here that is RM1, even though it was an RM1, we have the right to rely on those representations and to infer those.
we have the right to rely on those representations and to infer those representations to actually
build our property in such a manner. Where if this was an RM1 property, where across the street it is
with the same type of dimensions, we wouldn't be here because it would be as of right. So basically
that's where we are. My understanding is that there are, there may be representatives from
both the coordinating RCO as well as the other RCOs in attendance. So I will leave it to that
to like hear what they have to say and then I would like to reserve time to
respond to anything they have to say. Thank you. Do you have any witnesses
that you want to bring on before we reach out to the community? Yes, Mr. Weich.
Mr. Weich, you can unmute yourself? Yes, can you hear me?
Yes, sir. Please spell your name for the sonographer. Give us your name and address.
Sure. My name is spelled C-H-R-I-S. Last name is W-Y-C-H-E, and that's 5655 Carpenter Street.
Thank you. And do you swear and affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Please proceed, Mr. Hart.
Yeah, Chris, you heard everything I stated today.
yes is it true and correct yes and would you adopt it as your own testimony yes
okay would you like to add anything did i miss anything in terms of the you know of how we got
here today no i think you're pretty much covered it okay thank you uh questions from the board
no no uh anyone else who wishes to testify in this case please raise your hand
and if you're one here called upon please spell your name give us your name and
address by your name and then I'll swear you in
Katherine Blunt you can unmute yourself and wait to be sworn in
good afternoon Miss Blunt please spell your full name and give us your address
yes my name is
Catherine Blunt
B-L-U-N-T
I live at 4918
Walton Avenue
swear and affirm to tell the truth
the whole truth and nothing but the truth
I so do
Blunt could you give me
where Blunt
what was your address again
it's 4918
Walton Avenue
where is that in proximity to this
property? So I am with the 46th Ward RCO. That property is within the boundaries of the 46th
Ward RCO. Okay, thank you. Please proceed. Yes, so I am here to testify on behalf of the community.
The community meeting, which was the 20th of this month, August 20th, 2020,
it was did not really have many community members engaged on the zoom it was very difficult for us
to even tell who was on the zoom because we were all blanked out so we do know that there were
three members from the community on the zoom who and that's from the immediate community who opposed
the zoning variance. The other thing we understood was that Mr. Weish lives somewhere else. He doesn't
live at the current residence. His address is somewhere else. Another property he developed
that he now wants to develop the 5655 Carpenter Street and live there on the top floor, but we
know how long he's going to live there. So for us, it's, for them rather, it's a matter of him,
of course, being a realtor, being in the business of developing properties, he wanted to develop
the property and perhaps move on at another point. The community worked to what we call
correct zone and save zone, that neighborhood, because at some point, we don't know when.
whole areas of West Philadelphia were rezoned residential multifamily.
West Philadelphia, particularly in that area, those were single-family homes and single-family
homeowners and had been so since time we don't know when. The people who moved in and lived there
for 50 to 60 years who want to keep those uh property values uh
intact and want to kind of gain uh what we would call
kind of gain what we would call familiar wealth for their families, they want to keep that
uh a familiar
neighborhood that way. And that's why they fought for that. They fought for the neighborhood
to be correct zone to RM1. I'm not sure what happened to the other side of
Carpenter Street, because when we organized and had community meetings, et cetera, and we met
with the Planning Commission and the planning maps were developed. The other side of Carpenter
Street, including Washington Street, were supposed to be returned to residential multifamily.
That did not happen. We don't know why. And so we will investigate that. So we did go around and
speak to community members. And that was done by the 46th Ward committee person who was in that
20th division. Over 85 homes in the area were approached. There's a response to 85, and we got
a response of 85 homeowners, residents who said they were not in favor. Well, I'm going to actually
object to that in terms of hearsay well no we have uploaded well but she is she is representing
the rco so we'll have it so we have uploaded um to the zba i mean this whole process is all new to
us uh unlike the attorney and uh so we are just community folk trying to uh fit in with this
process uh but we did upload those signatures to the zba we will make them available uh to the
lawyer as well upon request. But we did speak with those homeowners. They, it is not. I'm going to
actually object because I actually talked to Ms. Blunt earlier today and asked if there was going
to be a letter that was going to be distributed or any materials. And I asked that if there were
any, that I would have access to it before the hearing. So if there are signatures that, if there
were any submissions, I would object to the, to the submission, especially if there are for
individuals who are not present at the hearing we can you can but you see we had a conversation yes
and and basically what i said to you was that during that zoom meeting which was very confusing
um and awkward uh that the when we when even i suggested that there were community members who
were not in favor of, and we were talking about the need for there to be a real community
meeting, you should have then, and this is what I told you today, you should have then
requested for a continuance to really arm out all of these concerns and to meet with
the community so that we wouldn't be in here in this meeting now.
You then said, okay, well, I'll do a continuance. But I have no guarantee of what you will or will not do. The only thing I can say is that the community is not represented except by us and has not been spoken to except for by us. Now, if you wish to speak to the community, that can be arranged with the understanding that the ZBA sees that as part of the process.
Alan, refresh my memory. The opposite side of the street, which is RM1, was that part of a more recent zoning classification?
So my understanding, Mr. Chair, is that, are you in front of your computer? Do you see the zoning map in front of you?
Yes, I do.
okay so you see our side is rsa5 the other side is rm1 that's right and and our side was rm1
up until the middle december of 2019 unbeknownst to us it got changed the other side never was
changed it wasn't changed at the same okay so was existing as rm1 that's right so this whole
neighborhood if you even look right here is rm1 this is cmx2 above montreal street i see a lot
of yellow so there is but i just want to i i this is really important because if you look
they're they're literally mirror images of each other but they're being treated differently
um in terms in terms of the community you know input when we all we did was we we met with the
you know with the community based on the coordinating rco the coordinating rco told
us to meet via a zoom meeting which we did and when there was some inclination to meet separately
with the community we stated that we would meet in person with the community and if you look at
we stated that we would meet in person with the community and if you look at the letter from
the letter from
Cobbs Creek they actually referenced that we did try to meet with the community and for whatever
reason we couldn't get a definitive date in terms of meeting but if you look at Cobbs Creek neighbors
they're also saying that even though there were members in the who are part of this uh vote
they're actually saying for the they're leaving it up to the decision of the board the discretion
and the board to make that decision so they're not like even though the people that were there
were against it and i don't know if there were i don't know and i can't say this for sure but i
don't think the immediate neighbor was there i think there was reference that the immediate
neighbor would be against it but i don't know if the immediate neighbor was actually at the
community meeting but we did make overtures to to meet i always believe in meeting with the community
did you can i speak was it was it was it my accurate that the count was three opposed and
two in favor or was it the opposite way let me take a look i um it was it actually it was three
well i don't know it looks like i i don't want to state i i didn't take the vote right so
yeah i mean there were three people not opposed and there were it says two people opposed from
the board and five people in attendance so let's just say it was five people all opposed right i
I'm just going to give it the benefit of the doubt, right?
It was a split vote for all intents and purposes,
but even the coordinating RCO stated that they would leave it up to the
discretion of the board to decide.
And I did speak to the representative from the coordinating RCO at the
beginning of the meeting, and it really is a straightforward situation.
It's unfortunate.
We're not trying to create precedent here.
We're not trying to take advantage of the situation.
There was a transition from RM1 to RSA5.
if and and everyone knows that the city's website takes a little bit of time to to catch up to these
things it was at the end of the year where the zoning changed and it again it's it really should
be apples to apples rather than apples to oranges where if you're on one side of carpenter street
you're treated differently than you're on the other side of carpenter street you know i understand
when you say it takes a while for the agency different city agencies to catch up but the
zoning remapping is part of a public process so they had hearings in city council it isn't like
this just happened without any public knowledge of it so i just want to point that out no i hear
that mr chair it's just that if you go if you go here if you go in the public records and and you
see this as rm1 you're relying on that as rm1 so i i hear what you're saying all right is anyone
else who wishes to testify if so please raise your hand. Chair I had Nicole Crawford. Nicole
you can unmute yourself and speak. Hi my name is Nicole Crawford. I am the committee person for
the 46th Ward 20th division. Ms. Crawford do you swear to affirm to tell the truth the whole truth
and nothing but the truth. I do. Now Carpenter Street is exactly my division and I did go door
to door and speak to most of the residents on the block and one of the residents that was that lives
right next to the property 50 55 I'm sorry you know 56 55 Carpenter he is greatly opposed and
he was on the Zoom meeting speaking about it. The neighbor on the other side, we spoke with her
directly. She had some troubles getting into the Zoom meeting. She was not able to voice her
concern, but she did sign the petition. The neighbor that is across the street on the corner,
for instance, just within that vicinity, although her area is zoned for multifamily use, she is
vietnamese um against having that um you know to be a duplex so yes like the meeting that we had
the zoo meeting was very very passionate um because we fought so hard with the community
to get there and i was there helping my my division fight for that for our homes to be
protected um we are not opposed to him if he would like to um redevelop the house as a home
a three bedroom home as other properties on that block have there's also there's also a property
that's for sale that they develop really nicely on that block um as a home um we would not be
opposed to that but we are definitely opposed and we do not agree with creating a duplex thank you
thank you very much you're welcome who else if so please raise your hand and give us something new
different please no other hands are up okay I think I already asked the board
Okay, I think I already asked the board.
I'll just ask any questions from the board
I'll just ask any questions from the board.
Yes, Mr. Chairman.
I'm going to ask questions, I think.
Yeah, I'd like to know where the applicant lives.
He lives at 71st and Elmwood.
Mr. White, can you confirm that?
Yes, I do.
I bought this property approximately 11 years ago, and I live in a car lane.
Yeah, the one on Elmwood.
Who purchased this property on Carpenter?
Was it single family or multifamily?
A carpenter currently single family.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Planning Commission.
I'm sorry, Tom, you done?
yeah i think i just want to i just want to clarify it when he purchased the property on
carpenter street he understood it to be rm1 it is rsa 5 but he understood it to be rm1
understood thank you planning commission
the uh ready for the planning commission yes okay this uh property is indicated currently
indicated for a single-family residential use on the city plan the applicant has not demonstrated
necessary hardship regarding use requirements of the code it's inappropriately inconsistent with
our adopted district plan uh and the recent remapping we recommended the dequest variance
thank you and before i give my vote i'd just like to thank ms blunt and ms crawford and i suggest
that you speak with the newly elected councilwoman because i got a feeling that there may be other
applications coming in similar to this one about getting your remapping done
with the Planning Commission on the other RM1 sites. Having said that, calendar