Board of Adjustment. I'll be participating in today's hearing along with our Board Secretary,
Confessor Plaza, and Board Member, Mr. Thomas Holloman. Board Administrator Tanya Sunkit and
Board Attorney Sharon Saleta are also in attendance. For those of you who haven't yet
participated in one of our virtual hearings, I'll go through some of the basics of what you can
expect. First, we will be administering oaths to individual participants prior to their testimony.
Second, for the benefit of anyone participating by phone, we ask that attorneys and witnesses
identify themselves prior to speaking or testifying.
Third, we'd like to advise everyone that this proceeding is being recorded and that by
participating, you acknowledge your agreement to be recorded.
Fourth, for anyone participating by phone, if you wish to testify, you must raise your
hand by hitting star nine and then star six to unmute yourself.
I'll repeat, for anyone participating by phone, if you wish to testify, you must raise your hand by hitting star 9 and then star 6 to unmute yourself.
Finally, to enter an appearance statement, call Google 267-270-5548 and leave your email address and the address of the property at issue.
i'll repeat to enter an appearance statement call google 267-270-5548 and leave your email address
and the address of the property at issue with that said we can begin but before our secretary
calls our first case we like to ask if anyone is requesting a continuance or a withdrawal
of an appeal listed to be heard this morning?
If so, please raise your hand.
We have Rachel Pritzker.
Rachel, you can unmute yourself and wait to be sworn in.
Good morning.
Please identify yourself.
You know the drill,
spell your first and last name for the record.
Rachel, R-A-C-H-A-E-L, Pritzker, P-R-I-T-Z-K-E-R, 1635 Market Street, Suite 1600, Philadelphia, PA, 19103.
You swear and affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
Thank you. Please proceed.
I'm asking for a continuance for 1407-09R Grange Street.
we are needing a little bit more time to work through some plans so I wanted to ask for a
continuance for that matter. Okay is is the applicant or the attorney on this case and you
are the attorney I'm sorry is there anyone who disagrees with the issuance of a continuance on
this case? If so, please raise your hand. Charles Richardson, are you here on behalf
of this case? You're going to be awake to be sworn in. Morning, Mr. Richardson. Please
let them by yourself for the record. Charles Richardson from the Office of Councilwoman
Cindy Bass, Room 312 City Hall. We have no objection to the granting of a continuance
for this and uh we look forward to working with Ms. Pritzker to try to alleviate any
situations that might be going on with the with the case. Thank you. Anyone else?
We have Sloan Folks. Sloan Folks you can unmute yourself and wait to be sworn in.
Mr. Folks, are you here on Grange Street? I don't think he's here on this one.
Oh, you talked about anyone else for this one, so no.
I'm sorry. All right. So I'll put that in the record. MI 2020-001230, 1407-09 West Grange, G-R-A-N-G-E Street is continued.
this is Sharon Saleta since this is a follow-up hearing do we want to give it
a new date or continue it as attorney moving party all right so let me I'll do that again
MI-2020-001230-1407-09 West Grange attorney moving party
yes thank you any other requests for continuance or withdrawals
Sloan folks.
Sloan Folks.
Good morning, Chairman and CBA board. My name is Sloan Folks, S-L-O-A-N-E. Folks, FS on Fire, OLKS,
Room 508 City Hall, 19107.
We're going to affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
Yes, sir, I do.
Thank you.
We're requesting a continuous calendar number 3-9-9-0-2-3-2-4-0 North Front Street.
The applicant has not met with the RCO, and we wish for them to do so, and I have time for the public to weigh in.
You have a – what's that calendar number you have?
I have calendar number 39902, but I think it's also under MI-2020-000.
This is Sharon Slutta. It's number 11 on the hearing list.
Right. It's MI-2020-000223, correct?
Yes, sir.
And we also received no exhibits for this case.
Okay. So MI 2020-000223, 3240 North Front Street is continued.
Can we confirm that no one representing the applicant is here?
Yeah, I'm just going to ask. Is the applicant present or the attorney for this case present?
If so, please raise your hand.
No hands.
Thank you. Any other requests for continuances or withdrawals? Please raise your hand.
No hands at this time, but I do have a couple to go over.
Okay. Tanya, when you read them off, could you give me the page number? That way, when I go
through my phone, because I can't print out, I'll know which one not to call up.
So number five on your list, 15-14 Tasker, that was heard already by the board and granted.
So this is an error on the list.
It should be on there, correct?
Correct.
So do I need to, we don't need to read it in or do we?
If just to make sure if anyone came for it.
Okay. What is that? Hold on a second. I apologize because I got to scroll down my phone.
No, take your time, Chair.
MI 2020-000253, 1514 Tasker Street. Is there anyone who was interested in this case?
No hands.
Okay. So that case was already decided last week, if I'm not mistaken, correct?
I know it was a little while ago.
Oh, wow.
Any others?
And I have number seven on your list.
As a request for continuance from the RCO.
FI2020-001487.
221 West Coulter, C-O-U-L-T-E-R Street.
Request for a continuance.
I don't know if anyone is here. It's only from the RCO.
Is the applicant and or the attorney present?
No hands at this time.
Thank you. So MI 2020-001487, 221 West Coulter Street is continued.
that's all i have chair okay um all right let me go back to where i started here
so first one on the list is continued correct range yes and next one would be uh confessor
I don't know if you have the list, so I'll read it off.
It's MI 2020-000521, 1437 Parrish Street.
We've promoted Sarah Alderfer.
Sarah, you can unmute yourself and wait to be sworn in and share your screen as you wish.
Thank you, Tonya. Please identify yourself, spell your first and last name for the record.
Sarah Alderfer, S-A-R-A-H-A-L-D-E-R-F-E-R, 1500 JFK Boulevard, Suite 800, Philadelphia PA, 19102.
Sarah Alderfer, S-A-R-A-H-A-L-D-E-R.
I'm here today as counsel for the owner and applicant brought in management, and I'm going to share my screen.
You're swearing the firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing about the truth?
Do you agree to wait the reading of its refusal and stipulate to attack, Gerson?
I do. Also, have you emailed an exhibit packet with the required documents, proof of ownership,
proof of tax compliance, copy of the refusal or referral, photos and plans five days prior to
this hearing? I have. Also, have you met with the RCO and have a letter? Yes, we have. Thank you.
You may proceed. Good morning, Mr. Chair, members of the board. I'm here today as counsel for
Broaden Management. Its principal, Matt Shapson, I believe is also on the Zoom, and also present
today is the design team, Gnome Architects. 1437 Parrish Street is a 671.25 square foot lot,
which is zoned RM1. It's located in Francisville on Parrish Street, just off Broad Street between
North Carlisle and North 15 streets. The refusals we're here for today are because we are proposing
to build a duplex on the RM1 lot, and due to the undersized nature of the lot, we have a refusal
for side yard, five feet proposed where seven feet is required, and for the size of the lot
being 671.25 square feet, which would prohibit, which would allow one unit by right, but prohibits
two dwelling units. Going to the pictures of the surrounding area, which is on page
35 of the PDF that I previously identified. Excuse me, page 39.
you can see the surrounding area is developed as a multi-family area the building here which
is immediately to the west of our lot is a duplex and these and and this building which is also to
the west is multi-family in addition this is the lot our property here and to the right of it
is a church and then this and again this is the church here
and then across the street we have multi-family and then a vacant lot here um the
The property was previously approved in 2017 as a artist studio on the first floor with
off-street parking and three units. And that permit appears in your packet at Exhibit 9,
which is on page 56 um that was never erected but it is the most it is the most recent approval
for the lot um after that point in time in 2017 um in 2018 the lot was rezoned from irmx to rm1
by bill number 180286-A, which is at tab 11 of your packet.
And so we're seeking a variance to develop this property as a duplex
to fit in with the character of the surrounding area and the lot as it is rezoned.
So now taking a look at the plans, which are at tab 7,
page 52 is the zoning site plan. Let me zoom out for you guys.
So the proposal, as said earlier, is a duplex. The proposal is two bi-level units, first
floor, second floor, and then third floor, fourth floor. The refusals here stem from
the rear yard not being five feet deep instead of seven feet deep. At this point in time,
I'd like to note that the property of Butts and Alley, which is approximately two feet wide,
two feet wide so the alley is not included in our property for the purposes of zoning
so the alley is not included.
but it our the rear of our building would in fact be seven feet from the next adjacent building
in addition there's an alley that runs between our property here and the adjacent property of
the church which is four feet wide so there's space at the east side of the building
Taking a look at the rendering, which is page 49, this shows the
which, excuse me, my computer wants to keep scrolling.
Well, as I'm scrolling back down, the rendering shows, which is on page 49, shows the front
of the building that we're proposing, we're proposing a map to put an existing brick on
the front and match the cornice line of the building that is to the west of us.
and I would note that the building to the west of us 1439 is a duplex as well and has a brick
facade and then the church building here also has a brick facade so we're looking to match
the character the neighborhood by including a brick facade up to the cornice line of the
adjacent building. We met with the coordinating RCO Francisville Neighborhood Development Corporation
and got their support. Their letter appears on tab 13, which is page 104 of the PDF.
You can see here the vote was in support, 10 in support, one in opposition, and one in
non-opposition. There was one person who did not vote as 13 people attended the meeting.
That concludes my presentation. At this time, I'd like to ask my client a few questions.
Matt, if you could unmute yourself.
Hello, Sarah.
Hi, Matt. Could you state and spell your name for the record, please?
Sure, it's Matthew Shapson, M-A-T-T-H-E-W-S-H-A-P-S-O-N.
And what's your relationship to Broad and Management?
I'm the owner.
And Broad and Management owns the property at 1437 Parrish Street, is that correct?
That's correct.
Have you heard my statements that I made today?
I have.
Are they true and correct?
Yes, they are.
Do you adopt them as your own?
Yes. That concludes my presentation.
I'd be willing to answer any questions the board has.
No questions.
Sarah, I'm going to unshare because I think, okay, there we go.
Did you hear me now?
Yeah, you went out and went back in.
Yeah, I had to go back in.
All right.
Any questions from the board?
No questions.
Thank you.
Anyone else in the audience who would like to testify in this case?
If so, please raise your hand.
no hands at this time thank you planning commission ron please identify yourself
with a record and i'll swear you in oh it's actually dave uh good morning david effecto
f-e-c-t-e-a-u with the city planning commission we're in firm to tell the truth the whole truth
and nothing but the truth yes sir i do thank you please proceed thank you sir mr chairman
Thank you, sir. Mr. Chairman and members of the board, this property is indicated for industrial and residential mixed use in the city's comprehensive plan. If this property had remained zoned as IRMX, more density would have been permitted on this site. Accordingly, we have no objection to granting this variance.
members of the board, this property is in.
Thank you. MI-2020-000521, 1437 Parrish Street. My vote is yes.
My vote is yes. My vote is yes.
Thank you. Confessor, before you call, I'm just getting a text from Sharon. Give me a second,
see what it's about.
All right, Sharon, before any emails, that's not it.
I was asking if you could call the add-on, the follow-up hearing for 1302 North 18th
Street.
Yeah. We can call that now? Yes. Okay. MI 2020-000-688-1302-North 18th Street.
And the attorney is Leo Mulvihill.
all right good morning chairman members of the board
nice all right all right i feel that way sometimes oh yeah we're just dead inside
yeah you swear i found to tell the truth the whole truth for nothing but the truth
i do and do you agree to wait the reading of its refusal and stipulate to attack your scene
I do. Also, have you emailed an exhibit packet with the required documents, proof of ownership,
proof of tax compliance, copy of the refusal or referral photos and plans five days prior to this
hearing? I have. Also, have you met with the RCO and have a letter? Yes. Thank you. Please
identify yourself for the record. Good morning, members of the board. Leo Mulvihill, M-U-L,
G.S. and Victor, I-H-I-L-L, 2424 East York Street, Suite 111, Philadelphia, 19125.
I'm here today on a follow-up to a hearing that was held last week for 1302 North 18th Street.
So members of the board, just to review briefly,
we are here today for purposes of requesting a variance to allow for a new
two-family dwelling on a vacant lot. What I'm showing now is the area that we were discussing,
indicating here this hatched area, is what we were proposing, two dwelling units, 1302 North
18th Street. As you can see, the other areas that are shaded either dark gray indicate that those
are multifamily or two-family units. The light gray are single-family homes. This proposal was
supported by the City Planning Commission based on our presentation at the prior session.
What I finally received the other day and previously forward to the Zoning Board,
which I will share and mark as applicants additional exhibit B.
let's see
there we go
members of the board what I'm showing now on the screen
is a letter from the friends of 47th Ward dated October 8th 2019
and as previously discussed this was a socially distanced meeting that was held
on the 1600 block of Cecil B. Moore outside
I was requested to join by telephone for the hearing. So at that meeting I received this
letter indicating that three members who attended opposed the application as presented and nine
meeting attendees opposed the application. Although the total number of attendees was
nine so I'm not quite sure how that vote works out because the math doesn't really work out for me.
Basically, in the letter of explanation, which I'm now showing on the screen, Ms. Louise Bundy of the RCO Friends of 47th Ward indicated that the community's preference is to maintain single-family homes in the area.
As previously discussed during our presentation in chief, there's a prevalence of multifamily in this area.
new single-family homes would significantly raise the cost for new potential tenants
for new potential tenants or homeowners on the property and that was the request based on the
or homeowners on the property, and that was the request.
precedent in the area based on the fact that these would be more affordable based on the support
of the city planning commission for our two family development that we were proposing that
irrespective of the position of the rco friends of 47th board that i asked the zoning board to
vote in favor of this variance request thank you is there anyone else who wishes to testify
I would like to testify in this case.
If so, please raise your hand.
Chair, we have Mary Jones from the council's office.
Thank you.
Good morning, Ms. Jones.
Please identify yourself for the record and I'll swear you in.
good morning um mary jones council president daryl clark's office room 494 city hall uh 19107
you swear to firm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth
uh yes i do thank you mary please proceed yeah um yes our office would just like to adopt the
position of the rco they do request they would prefer to have single family housing and not more
multifamily um in their neighborhood thank you thank you questions from the board no no planning
commission good morning uh david effectos city planning commission i believe we had put it on
record before but we'll do it again. This property is indicated for residential single-family use
in the city's comprehensive plan. We do not believe that two units will have a negative
impact on the block. Accordingly, we have no objection to granting this variance.
Thank you. MI 2020-0006881302 North 18th Street. My vote is no.
My vote is no.
My vote is no.
Thank you members of the board.
Thank you.
Next one is
I'm not sure but somebody's mic is open
And it's
Too much noise
Thank you
Is that better?
I think 51st readers are next case
yes okay um mi2020-000073 1726 north 51st street
the applicant is not represented by council i don't believe that she is it's janine avery
Ms. Avery, please identify yourself with a record, spell your first and last name and
your address.
Ms. Avery, you can unmute your mic and wait to be sworn in.
avery must you need to mute your mic unmute your mic
thank you again please spell your first and last name and identify yourself as
first and last name and give us your address
Yes, Janine, J-E-A-N-I-N-E, last name Avery, A-V-E-R-Y. My address is 811 North 15th Street, Philadelphia, PA, 19130.
You swear to the firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
Yes, I did.
Thank you. Please proceed.
um ma'am have you emailed an exhibit packet with the required documents proof of ownership
proof of tax compliance copy of the refusal or referral photos and plans five days prior to this
hearing i did email the packet and i received a confirmation of receipt as well awesome uh have
you also met with the rco and have a letter so i i did meet with the rco um in late february
So, I did meet with the RCO in late February, but now, after listening, I think I may need a continuance because I do not have a letter.
If this is simply a matter of getting the letter and the meeting has already been held, maybe we could schedule this for a follow-up hearing to present the letter.
I'm sorry, what was that, Sharon?
If the meeting was already held and it's simply waiting for the letter, maybe we could follow up and ask Ms. Avery to make an attempt in the meantime to get the letter, but she could go forward today.
She did submit all of her other documents.
Okay, we'll do that, and then at the end we'll give a specific date, correct?
Okay, thank you.
Proceed, Ms. Avery.
okay so please forgive me that i am a novice at this um but don't worry we're all we all are
we're it's a learning it's a it's a lesson that we're learning as we go thank you um so should i
be uh sharing my screen i i didn't that would be helpful okay it would be helpful
so uh basically this is um my my house or I guess I inherited this house from my father
miss Avery pardon the interruption but could you hit the share screen at the bottom of the screen
yep I'm pulling the documents up now um
And apologies also for third grade in the background.
Okay, let me know when you can see what I'm sharing.
okay nothing yet
now we got it all right
okay so i have here the it's coming up so we're now looking at your email
yeah all right all right all right okay all right
so what might work better if you come out of share screen
then open up your document.
All right.
I'm out of share screen.
Here, I'll close it.
Okay, now go and open up the documents you want to present.
Have them open on your screen, then hit share screen.
All right.
All right, I have, all right, let's see.
okay so now you have your documents open
or they're not opening no they're just not so i had them open and
and then did you hit the green share button at the bottom because once you have them open then
you hit the green share and then your document should come forward on the screen all right
All right, I'm going to share a button again.
Okay, how about now?
It's coming up.
There we go.
We got you.
Go forward.
All right, so this is the refusal.
This is a refusal.
um it's zoned a single family um it's a two-story house single family um so my plan was to
convert it to a duplex so to zone it as multi-family um I have
this is evidence of the notice or the meeting with the RCO, which I did have on February 20th.
Ms. Avery, could you, I couldn't tell from your exhibits which RCO you met with. Do you remember
the name? Lucinda Hudson, Parkside. Parkside RCO? Yes. Thank you.
um that was february 20th and i did meet with them and it was my understanding that it was
um you know the the vote was in my favor but i do not have evidence of that
um shortly after that it's kind of when things kind of shut down
um and i guess so pictures of the property itself i guess i can go through those next this is the
the outside of the property um to the left is still a single family home to the right there
are plans for it's a vacant lot right now to the right there are plans for a community garden
there um that has been approved and everything through zoning already um through a different
organization um so this is the property i there's a bunch of pictures of the property
i'm not sure what i should throw in on i guess um i also submitted uh plans
let me open those i don't know they're open
Okay, one second.
I'm going to stop share again and try to open the plant.
Thank you.
Okay, I'm going to start to share again.
Okay here they are. So basically the plans are the work is minimal to the outside of the house
other than creating a second entry in the front.
so thinking or deciding what it wants to do here but um again the the work is minimal to
the outside of the property the majority of the work is interior to um to make it
suitable for a two-family home where the second story would be one flat apartment and then the
flat apartment and then the first floor and part of the basement would be
the first floor and
the other apartment.
Okay and please let me know how I should present these other than just showing the difference.
um this first drawing here is showing you know the neighbor on the left and then the vacant lot
that's on the right that I mentioned is set for a a community garden um
let's see
okay so on the left here is the the basement of the property
The last here is the basement. This is the front of the basement. The majority of the basement
would just be utility space because of the height of the basement. The back portion of the basement
the plan is to open up the first floor to make the back portion of the basement a usable space
which would increase the height of the ceiling to make it a livable space and include a bedroom
space, a bathroom, and a closet. And then the first floor of the property, as I mentioned,
the back space would be open. And then there would be the kitchen area and a half bath and
And then living space, and this is the existing front porch.
I mentioned that the change to the outside, the only thing would be to create an additional entryway, which would be included on the right.
The existing entry is already right here on the, I'm sorry, on the left.
Existing entry is already on the right.
Ms. Avery, excuse me, could you go back to the basement drawing?
What is the means of ingress, egress from the bedroom?
So it's here. Here existing already is, there's three windows in the basement and these, my
understanding from the designer, the architect, is that these would be, would have to be made
into the egress window. These two right here.
You can summarize. Have you completed your testimony?
I guess I can just show the second floor living space, which would be one flat apartment.
the rear would be the living space and then the kitchen space here there's already an existing
bedroom right here which would remain and then the front bedroom is already existing and that
would remain as well you may have mentioned this i may have missed it uh do you have a letter from
the rco i do i do not um i met with the rco but i did not receive a letter okay that's what we
I thought, yeah, you're right.
We said we'd adhere to case and hold.
And let's answer this.
Any questions from the board?
Oh, sure.
No, please do.
Absolutely.
Excuse me.
This is Sharon Saleta.
I actually have the head of the RCO on the phone right now.
If we could put this back, perhaps she would be able to confirm by phone
whether there was a letter of support i'm sorry if we could what if you could um hold the vote
for a few minutes i'm yeah sure okay all right i'm just going to ask if anyone else had anything
to uh sorry no problem should we go to the next case or you just wait a couple minutes
yes i'm actually i'm on the i'm on hold for the head of the rco i thought perhaps if she could
confirm that there was a letter of support that you might be able to vote it today so if you could
just um hear the next case and then i will let you know um if i'm able to get a response
so we'll move to the next case correct yes that sounds good chair
thank you so if miss avery if you can stand by until we get that um verification and i'm
and I'm going to close your video. Thank you kindly. Thank you.
going to close your video thank you kindly thank you
So our next case would be MI 2020-000076. 1911 West George Street.
West George Street, I believe, Mr. Orfanides.
please raise your hand
good morning david please identify yourself for the record spell your name
Sure. David Orphanides. Last name is spelled O-R-P-H-A-N-I-D-E-S.
I'm sorry, finish.
Orphanides and Toner, LLP, 2 Penn Center, 1500 John F. Kennedy Boulevard, Suite 800, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, 19102.
I'm here this morning on behalf of TGT Properties, LLC, the owner of the subject premises, 1911 West George Street.
Thank you.
I swear and affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth.
Mr. Fennini, do you agree to waive the reading of its refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
I waive the reading.
I have had email exchanges with the examiner regarding the notice of refusal.
So I can't stipulate to its accuracy.
I think there's a refusal that should be.
Okay. Have you emailed an exhibit packet with the required documents, proof of ownership, proof of tax compliance, copy of the refusal of referral, photos, and plans five days prior to this hearing?
I did.
Also, have you met with the RCO and have a letter?
I have, and I do.
Thank you. Please proceed.
So I am going to share my screen.
Give me one minute.
Can everybody see my screen?
Great.
right so again uh david orphanese on behalf of tgt properties llc uh on the call with me this
morning i have sean frankel from tgt properties llc and rustin oler from harman deutsch oler
architecture they prepared the plans for this matter the some administrative matters to get
out of the way at tab one you have the posting of the photographs of the photographs of the
posting at the subject property 1911 west gerard or west george the posting of the notice and the
notice of refusal that was done in accordance with the code and the current regulations our
tax compliance is at exhibit two and then the deed for the subject property showing tgt properties
llc as the owner at exhibit three exhibit four we have aerial images of the subject property
you can see uh west george street uh runs to the south between south of cambridge the north of
poplar uh we're obviously between 19th and 20th street so you can see in the aerial image here
the property is currently a paved lot from the deed you can see that the lot is only 16 feet
wide and 35 feet deep it's only 560 square feet in area very small lot it's our position it's
basically too small to build on as you can see from the aerial and you'll see from the photographs
that I'm going to show you later on that there are there's a lot of off-street parking on this
block and a lot of it is used not as a garage but as just a either the backyard of a property that
fronts on Cambridge we are on the north side of West George and Cambridge again is to the north
bus or um is in and of itself a just a parking lot ours would be in the application is for a
non-accessory parking for two vehicles my client owns other properties around the corner
over on 19th street and it's utilized by the residents.
over on 19th street and it's utilized by the residents of those units here's additional
aerial images this image is from 19th street again you can see our our parking our property
down to the right about 20 percent of the way down the lot on the north side the view from the west
the property zoned rsa5 as i think everybody on the board knows rsa5 does not permit non-accessory
parking by right so the fact that this parking is not does not have a another use on the property
that to which it would be accessory particularly a residential use in the rsa5 zoning district
requires relief from the zoning board photographs show the subject premises
that has been used as parking for some time the lots to either side are used for parking
that front on george street you can see in the existing photographs there's a garage to the west
where there's parking there's surface parking to the right
and here are other images of showing all of west george street is the set even though there are
some properties you'll see in the photographs that do front in terms of a residence on west
george street the lion's share of it it's a very fairly narrow street it basically serves as a back
alley for the properties on cambridge or poplar on the south side of cambridge and the north side of
poplar or in this case on the west side of as you can see in the bottom photograph at page three
uh of exhibit six properties on the west side of north 19th street again parking parking uh this
post office we back up to the post office at 19th and poplar this bottom of page six of views the
backs of properties on the north side of poplar street more parking more parking page nine more
parking page 10 more parking page 11 parking page 12 parking page 13 parking page 14 swinging back
around to the property abutting our property to the west uh parking as well uh exhibit seven is
our application again the creation of two parking spots one is compact one is standard size given
the lot size the original application included a plan which you can see at page eight that had the
spaces stacked or shotgunned one behind the other uh you'll see and i forwarded these the revised
plans to sharon just this morning i'm not sure if it requires the board to stamp them but to improve
the functionality of the parking you'll see in revised plans we actually staggered them or offset
them that's the only change that we have to the plans that were originally submitted
the notice of refusal originally as referenced i did have a bit of a question with the
examiner the non-accessory parking as i already stated uh is the refusal in terms of the minimum
stall depth um as i indicated one of our spaces is a compact space which is less than the required
18 feet deep i do have some emails as recent as last week with the examiner where my position is
that since this is not required parking that you could and it's not accessory it's non-accessory
that you could effectively have a substandard space and not receive a refusal but i mean it
is what it is you still would be left with the one refusal for having non-accessing non-accessory
parking in the rsa zoning district but those emails are included in my exhibit book going
back and forth and citing the provisions of the code regarding the same our appeal is included
at exhibit 10 which is timely filed our project information form also submitted in a timely manner
an appropriate manner 19 this 1900 block we pulled the city plan the 1900 block of west
george street is on the city plan it is on the city plan and open so it is a city street it is
not a back alley and you can see here
at exhibit 12 an area plan that harman deutsch put together harman deutsch and older excuse me
rustin sorry no offense um the uh that shows our property right here uh that i've uh boxed in red
and then all the other parking that there is on the block which again was shown in the uh photographs
which again was shown in the uh photographs i do i did we did go through and we pulled the
I do, I did, we did go through.
zoning archives for the other properties and those zoning archives which support the legality
of those parking spaces uh through the zoning process with the department licenses inspections
are included at tab 13. there's a summary at the beginning and then a lot of pages uh that follow
which we i don't think we have a desire to go through but you can see them all listed in the
index on the left uh a through r all the different properties uh and their zoning archives uh we did
receive uh back on december 31st wow we received the email from the planning commission almost a
year ago this appeal was about a year ago uh designated united designating united francisville
civic association as coordinating rco list of addresses uh to which we forwarded the 14 303
notice of uh the community group meeting that we did have with united francisville on february 12
2020. again that was uh was distributed in accordance with 14 303 include the notices of
refusal notice of refusal and the instructions were appealing or interacting with the zoning
board and here's our certificate of service showing the certified first class mailing or
documenting the certified first class mailing at the notice as i mentioned we did submit revised
plans or present revised plans that have been signed off or stamped off by the streets department
that shows the change in the configuration still two parking spaces still non-accessory
doesn't change any refusals, doesn't change the description of the project, but we thought that
it functioned better to stagger the two spaces rather than have them stacked. So those revised
drawings are included at exhibit 15. And then at exhibit 16, you can see we have our letter
of support from the coordinating RFCO, United Francisville Civic Association,
showing a pretty overwhelming support for what we were proposing.
just summarize and maybe uh break your witnesses what your witness i'm sorry what was that
instead of you could summarize and call your witness on up sure sure so in summary you have
a very small lot 560 square feet which it's zoned rsa5 which we would put to the board is
uh uniquely configured or a unique lot and that it is too small to build a single family dwelling
So given what you have there on the block, you have where you do have smaller locks like these, they've either been incorporated into the properties that front on Cambridge or front on Poplar and utilized as accessory parking or they're being used as non-accessory parking.
Given what West George Street is, it's basically an alley.
This use is appropriate, won't create any overcrowding in the streets, will not create traffic congestion.
There is a hardship given the size of the lot, given where it's located, given all the off-street parking that's on this lot to try to utilize it as a permitted single-family use.
And as such, we feel, in addition to meeting and satisfying the other criteria for the granting of the variance is set forth in the zoning code,
we feel that everything and taken in its totality warrants the granting of the variance in this case.
And with that, I'd like to call Sean Frankel.
Sean, I don't know.
Tanya, do you ask him to unmute himself or if he's already unmuted?
Is it a name or is it the device?
It should be under Sean Frankel.
But, Sean, if you're on, there's a little bottom left-hand corner of your screen.
There should be a mute or unmute button, hopefully.
I have a Pixel 3, is that?
Sean, raise your hand if that's you.
David?
Yep, great.
Hey, guys.
Good morning, sir.
Please identify yourself with a record.
Spell your first and last name.
It's Sean Frankl.
That's spelled S-E-A-N-F-R-A-N-K-E-L.
Do you swear and affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
David, please proceed.
Mr. Frankel, you've been in front of this board on many occasions, correct?
Correct.
correct and uh what is your position with tgt um with the owner of the property i am
David, excuse me
for interrupting. David, he's breaking
up terribly. Can't hear him. So
in the interest of time,
you're an officer of the court and we'll
stipulate that his testimony,
that he adopts your testimony.
Adopts my statements. Okay. Sean,
do you... Adopts your statements. I'm sorry.
All right. Thank you. Yes.
Okay. Thank you, Sean. Thank you.
And then Rustin Oller. Rustin,
I don't even think, no disrespect, I don't think we need Rustin.
I mean, we got so many cases.
Okay, I understand.
You explained it thoroughly, so I don't think there's any questions.
Any questions from the board?
There's no opposition.
There's no real.
All right.
Is there anyone who else wishes to testify in this case?
If so, please raise your hand.
no hands at this time thank you planning commission good morning david fecto city
planning commission mr chairman and members of the board this property is indicated for
residential use on the comprehensive plan the application matches the pattern of existing use
and development on the block we believe that this use does not pose any negative impacts
to the surrounding area accordingly we have no objection to granting the variance at this location
Thank you. Was there a proviso, David?
I'm sorry, revised plans.
Is it one page?
Yes, it's one page.
Okay, thank you. MI 2020-0000761911 West George Street. My vote is yes with the proviso. Revised plan, one page, approved today.
Yes, with proviso.
Yes, with proviso.
Thank you. I think Tasker Street was already done. Am I correct? That was continued. I'd rather number five.
This is Sharon Saleta. I don't know whether you want to go back to Ms. Avery's case.
You ready?
But I did speak with Lucinda Hudson, the contact person for the Parkside RCO, and she confirmed that a meeting was held and that the community supports the project. She will send a follow-up letter.
Okay, appreciate that. Thank you. So let's go back to number three on our list, I believe it was MI2020-000073, 1726 North 51st Street. Do we have any questions from the board?
anyone else who would like to testify in this case if so please raise your hand
no hands raised thank you planning commission good morning david effecto city planning commission
mr chairman and members of the board this property is indicated for residential single
family use in the city's comprehensive plan we do not believe that the addition of one unit
will have an adverse impact on the block.
Accordingly, we have no objection to granting this variance.
Thank you.
MI 2020-000073, 1726 North 51st Street.
My vote is yes.
My vote is yes.
My vote is yes.
Good luck.
So I think we go to number six.
Correct me if I'm wrong, anyone.
1505 West Gerard Avenue.
You are correct. Okay. MIA 2020-000366, 1505 West Girard Avenue. Mr. Jinn, I believe, is the attorney.
Good morning. Good morning, Mr. Jinn. Please identify yourself for the record.
Zen Jin, Z-H-E-N, J-I-N, 1617 John F. Kennedy Boulevard, Suite 1838, Philadelphia PA 19103, here on behalf of the applicant.
Do you swear and affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Thank you. Please proceed.
Mr. Zen Jin, you agree to waive the reading of his refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Also, have you emailed an exhibit packet with the required documents,
proof of ownership, proof of tax compliance,
copy of the refusal or referral, photos and plans five days prior to this hearing?
Yes, we have.
Also, have you met with the RCO and have a letter?
Yes, we do.
That was submitted last.
Thank you.
Please proceed.
Thank you.
Good morning.
This is an application by DTOPS Investment LLC.
I'm going to go ahead and share the information on the screen for the board's review.
I'm going to go ahead and share the information on the screen for the board's review.
We have submitted in this case a copy of the refusal, the support letter from the community,
certificate of tax clearance, deed, application, the project information sheet, photos, and plans.
The refusal on this matter is for two off-street parking spaces. This property is actually located
in a RM4 residential multifamily district. This is on Girard Avenue. The location itself is
currently a vacant lot. As the photograph shown here, this is an overhead view from the Google
maps and this is the actual property itself which is currently vacant. The proposal is essentially
to put up a three-story structure very similar to what is already on the block to be used as a six
family dwelling. I do want to point out that on Girard Avenue with the RM4 zoning the six family
although it sounds like a lot is actually consistent to what is normally there. Under RM4
were required to have two off-street parking spaces. Unfortunately, the only way to accomplish
that would be to put front-loaded garage in this case. And given the makeup of the block and the
amount of on-street parking that is available, the community actually would prefer not having
any garages to provide the off-street parking and keep things as it is. And that is the variance
we're requesting before the board. The plans for the property is shown here. I'm going
to try to zoom in to give the board a better view. Oops. Actually, that didn't work so
well. The site plan, as you can see, we're trying to keep the building's depth consistent
to what is there in the area. There is a rear yard left in the backside and the front will
be flush with the others. Three-story structure with a height.
Could you enlarge? Excuse me for interrupting. Make it a little larger, please.
Let me try to. I'll see if I can zoom enough so it's easier to read. Is this better?
Better. Thank you. Thank you. So we are proposing to have the building essentially the same
depth, height, and overall mass as what is already existing there. There will be a small courtyard
and a rear yard both available to the property. The floor plans as shown here would be a bi-level
first floor and basement front and back units as well as third and fourth floor would be
duplicated units that are front and back but essentially small two-bedroom units that are more
an efficiency type two-bedroom than a full two-bedroom layout but it is uniform on the
third and fourth floor with the design being one front unit, one back unit. This is the
floor plan, I'm sorry, second and third floor. This is a plan that will be replicated both
on the second and third floor of the property. Again, we're asking the board's consideration
in allowing for a variance to not have off-street parking for this particular new construction.
I'm happy to answer any questions from the board.
Thank you. Do you have any witness?
Yes, I believe a representative from the company who is also the owner is here, Mr. Chi-Fan Chen.
I don't know if his name would show up, but Mr. Chen, can you raise your hand so the board administrator can see you?
no hands i'm sorry i don't know i don't know he was with me this morning um and confirmed
here so as an officer of court will stipulate that your client would
agree to adopt your testimony. Let me, before we go any further,
where will it, that courtyard, is that accessible for all six units?
I do not believe the courtyard is necessarily accessible for all six units.
But what do we do about trash? There is, there is a
um there is there is a refuge enclosure um in the back for trash in the rear yard
for all six units i believe it is for all six units because the hallway runs through the first
floor all the way to the rear yard allowing the centralized stairway to be used by all units
So the lower unit, which occupies the first floor and basement, is that a stairwell, do I see, to the left of your drawing for ingress and egress, or no?
No. So once they enter, they would enter their unit, the stairwell to the basements within the unit.
Right. Is there an ingress and egress from the basement?
There's only egress windows on both ends here, both to the quarter as well as to the front and back.
Any questions from the board?
Anyone else who would like to testify in this case?
If so, please raise your hand.
It looks like this might be your client here, but there's no other hands up.
Planning Commission. Thank you, Tanya. Planning Commission.
Good morning. David Fecto, City Planning Commission.
Mr. Chairman and members of the board, this property is indicated for residential multifamily use in the city's comprehensive plan.
This application matches the pattern of development on the block.
We have no objection to granting this variance.
Thank you.
MI-2020-000366, 1505 West Gerrard Avenue.
My vote is yes.
My vote is yes.
My vote is yes.
Thank you.
Next, Coulter Street has already been continued.
We go to number eight.
Is that right, Tanya?
North 53rd Street.
SHARON SALETTA I HAVE NO RECORD OF HAVING RECEIVED EXHIBITS IN THIS ONE SO IS THERE ANYONE
WHO IS HERE TO TESTIFY ON MATTER NUMBER MI2020-001308 2247 NORTH 53rd STREET PLEASE RAISE YOUR
hand if you're here on this case no hands thank you mi-2020-001308 2247 north 53rd street is
continued. Ellsworth Street is next. The attorney on this one is Henry Clinton and we have received
an RCO letter in support. Okay. MI-2020-000837, 2701 Ellsworth Street.
Mr. Clinton.
Morning, Mr. Chairman.
Good morning, Mr. Clinton.
Please identify yourself with the record.
Henry Clinton, Queen Memorial Building, 1313 South 33rd Street,
Philadelphia PA, 19146.
Thank you.
You swear to the firm to tell the truth, the whole truth,
and nothing but the truth?
Thank you.
Mr. Plaza?
Mr. Planner, you agree to waive the reading of his refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Also, have you emailed an exhibit packet with the required documents, proof of ownership,
proof of tax compliance, copy of the refusal of referral, photos and plans five days prior
to this hearing?
Yes, I have, Mr. Plaza.
Thank you.
Also, have you met with the RCO and have a letter?
Yes, I do.
Thank you.
Please proceed.
Ms. Sunke, can I share my screen?
can you see my screen yes we can okay thank you uh i'm here on behalf of cal grace ferry llc
I'm here on behalf of Cal Grace Ferry LLC, the principal of that LLC.
the principal of that
Colin Lahren is on the call with us.
This is my exhibit package containing exhibits AA through A11.
Appearance statement, deed indicating ownership.
This is a notification to the community about our community meeting as well as today's meeting.
This is the refusal.
This project is in an I-2 zone, and we're proposing residential use.
And I want to go right to the photographs, because it'll help put everything in perspective.
So I'll work my way backwards.
So this is the project. It's a triangular piece of ground located on Grace Ferry Avenue,
which is a main artery into Center City and also to Washington Avenue.
Here's Washington Avenue here.
This is Grace Ferry Avenue heading east.
The board may recall, I was just before the board last week on a parcel right here by the same client, which the board looked kindly upon.
This is kind of a continuation of that development in the sense that there's a billboard on this piece of property which is being removed, and there's a billboard on this piece of property that's being removed.
um the proposal is for a commercial on the basement in the basement and on the first floor
and then two units above
here's another view of the existing parcel again heading towards center city you can see liberty
one liberty two the comcast tower the proposal is again here's the project first floor would be
commercial basement would also be commercial there's one unit on the second floor and then
another unit on the third and fourth floor again another perspective of the parcel
more photographs indicating the views on ellsworth street grace ferry
and this is a particular rendering that the community group asked for
because when they initially looked at the plot of ground,
it looked bigger than it really is.
There's huge sidewalks all around the parcel,
12 feet or so on most areas.
And from the apex to the edge of the property,
they're about 16 feet.
So when the community group first saw the project,
it appeared larger than what it was.
Here's the floor plan.
I can walk through it.
I mean, Derek Spencer is on the line with me, the architect,
but I think I can move through this
And if there's any questions for the architect at the end, that certainly will be permissible.
This is vacant commercial space on the first floor.
This is the second floor plan.
It would have one bedroom on the second floor.
And then the third and fourth floor would be another unit, and that would have three bedrooms.
There's also a roof deck, and you can see the derrick and Nome architecture step the roof deck back
so that you cannot see it from Grace Ferry Avenue or from Ellsworth Street.
Another unique thing they did is they did not put a pilot house on top of this structure.
The stairs to get to the roof are interior.
So again, you won't see any pilot house when you're looking at the top of the structure.
These are the elevations.
Really a pretty cool design with a curved front at the apex, a blend of brick and metal throughout.
Here's some other perspectives. I want to go back and show you that we did receive a letter of support actually last evening. We met with RODE, which is a suborganization in the Grace Ferry community, and they fully support this project.
with that i will take any questions uh and i rest and i'll ask mr laran if he's on the call
if he could be unmuted so he could adopt my testimony if he finds it true and correct
hey hey hey good morning again sir please identify yourself with the record spell your
first and least. Colin Lahren, C-O-L-I-N, last name L-A-R-E-N. And do you swear and affirm to
tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth? I do. Please proceed, Henry. Good morning,
Mr. Lahren. Have you heard my testimony today? Yes. If you had the opportunity to testify,
would you adopt my testimony as your own and as true and correct? Yes. Thank you. Mr. Chairman,
With that, I rest. I ask that my exhibits be admitted.
And again, just to recap, this is a residential slash commercial project in an I-2 zone.
And again, just to recap, this is a residential slash
We know that industrial is probably not coming back anytime soon in this area or in the city of Philadelphia.
So we're basically taking a long, vacant, irregularly shaped lot, which is unique in itself, with the existence of a billboard on it,
removing that and putting up a uh i think what the community group considers a beautiful
structure in his place thank you very much um questions from the board no no anyone else who
would like to testify in this case if you if you care to testify please raise your hand
no hands at this time thank you planning commission good morning david effecto city
planning commission mr chairman and members of the board this property is is indicated for medium
industrial use in the city's comprehensive plan we do not believe that the proposal for two units
with ground floor commercial will have a negative impact on the area accordingly we have no objection
to granting this variance. Thank you. MI-2020-000837, 2701 Ellsworth Street. My vote is yes.
My vote is yes. My vote is yes.
Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman and members of the board.
Number 10 on our list, MI 2020-000353, 2742 Germantown Avenue.
This is Sharon Saleta.
This is a request for a special exception.
There are no variances required.
anyone to testify um adriana hello can you hear me yes are you here for this case yes i'm the
property owner uh ma'am please identify yourself with the record spell your first and last name
I haven't promoted her yet I was just oh I'm sorry all right um and you're presented a case
by yourself correct okay I'll promote you to panelists my name is Adriana Maletto
A-D-R-I
Mileto you just faded away
I had to promote her to panelists
so she had to go out and come back in chair
now she's back
Mileto
Ms. Mileto
Mileto
Ms. Mileto
okay now she's ready okay thank you again miss milito would you please uh spell your first and
last name for the record sure first name a d r i a n a last name m i l e t t o we're in the firm to
tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth yes please proceed ma'am have you emailed an
exhibit packet with the required documents, proof of ownership, proof of tax compliance,
copy of the refusal or referral, folders and plans five days prior to this hearing?
Yes, my architect did.
Also, have you met with the RCO and have a letter?
Yes, I do.
Thank you.
Please proceed.
My project, this is my first time, so you have to excuse me.
My project is...
You're able to share your exhibits.
That would be helpful.
Yes, I can.
can you see my screen
yes we can yes
can you guys see my screen
yes okay um so this is my original letter uh i actually didn't know i was gonna have to go
through this process, but my building is on Germantown Avenue, 2742 Germantown. It is proposed
for a bi-level one-bedroom apartment above a commercial space. The commercial space, I wanted
to make a creative arts gallery venue for people to have events such as like spoken word,
art. So that's what the proposal was for. Because I want to have events, I guess it fell into the
So that's what the proposal was for.
Because I want to have events, I guess it fell into the assembly and entertainment category.
assembly.
Let me see.
I had my meeting with the city June, I think, 25th.
There was no opposition.
Ten people attended.
And I had that at the Village of Arts and Humanities.
I'll use that.
I'll use that.
I'll use that.
I'll use that.
So the existing structure, I'm not adding anything, I'm not trying to add any space,
but I do need to take down the existing front wall.
there is a huge gap between the bricks and I'm planning on putting two entrance doors one for
the apartment one for the commercial space and in the back as well there currently is a sealed door
the previous owner sealed the entire back I want to put a back door as you can see up top
right here there is a there's also a yard out back there that leads to an alleyway
this is the first floor right here so when you walk in it would just be open space
ADA compliant bathroom kitchen in the back room in the back this small rectangular shape would
be the HVAC system and then back here like I said would be an exit to the rear this would be the
second floor when you walk in and I know this is not part of the plans for the apartment it's not
part of the variance that I'm asking for but this would be the apartment I think
this might be the basement which is just empty
This is how the outside currently looks.
This is the rear of the building.
Like I said, they sealed the entire back of the building.
This is the inside on the first floor.
The steps will be moved forward for the apartment.
we get the picture um okay all right any questions from the board no no anyone else
would like to testify in this case if so please raise your hand
i have no hands at this time thank you planning commission good morning
david effecto city planning commission mr chairman and members of the board this
property is indicated for commercial and residential mixed use in the city's
comprehensive plan. This property
is on the Germantown and Lehigh commercial
corridor. New activity will
bring more customers, which may benefit
other businesses. Accordingly, we have
no objection to granting this special exception.
Thank you, David.
MI-2020-000353
Germantown Avenue. My vote is
My vote is yes.
My vote is yes.
Thank you.
Good luck to you. Thank you.
I believe the next case, MI 2020-000223, 3240 North Front Street, there was a request for a continuance.
There was a request for a continuance?
Yes, we have that as a continuance.
Yes, we have that.
That already did that.
All right, go to number 12.
MI-2020-000842-623 North 36th Street.
We have Meredith, who I've promoted to a panelist.
Good morning, Meredith.
please identify yourself with a record good morning mr chairman members of the board
meredith ferliger f-e-r-l-e-g-e-r 1500 market street suite 3500 e philadelphia pennsylvania
and i am here today on behalf of enj development property owner
do you swear and affirm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth
I sure do.
Thank you, Mr. Plot.
Meredith, you agree to wait to read in of his refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Thank you.
Also, have you emailed an exhibit packet with the required documents, proof of ownership,
proof of tax compliance, copy of the refusal or referral, photos and plans five days prior
to this hearing?
I sure did.
Also, have you met with the RCO and have a letter?
We did and we do.
Thank you.
Please proceed.
Thank you.
Before I get started, Jamie, if you want to just hit the raise hand button, we can get you sworn in before I get started.
Hello, Jamie Jimenez, J-A-I-M-E, J-I-M-E-N-E-Z.
your your your involvement in this case I am the owner
I swear I'm going to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth
I swear thank you Meredith please thank you Mr. Chairman members of the board as I mentioned I'm
here today on behalf of the property owner ENJ development represented here today by Jamie Jimenez
as the board can see in the photographs that I have up on the screen beginning at tab 15
the request before the board today concerns an existing structure that was just recently completed
that is located at 623 North 36th Street, which sits at the corner of North 36th Street and Mount
Vernon Street. And just so you have a sense of the context here. So you'll see it's right here
at the corner of North 36 and Mount Vernon. Now the structure was approved back in 2016
as a two-family dwelling with a ground floor commercial space. The prior permit and the
zoning plans from the construction are in the packet starting at Exhibit 5. So you'll see here
the former approval. Now at the time the lot was zoned CMX 2 which did require the ground floor
commercial space. We're before the board today to request a conversion of the ground floor space
into a third residential unit, as I'll explain. As is reflected in the floor plans at tab six,
the existing units that were previously approved on the second and third floor are over 1,100
square feet and are tri-level units. The newly proposed unit is a bi-level unit over 1,300
square feet. Trash is stored within each unit, as well as in a gated area in the rear.
I've included some photographs of the existing units, just so the board
gets a sense here of what these units look like. I'm just scrolling through.
With respect to the application, we received one refusal. Now this is somewhat odd. As I
mentioned, when the project was first approved, the property was zoned CMX2, so the ground floor
commercial space was required. Now, after Mantua was rezoned in 2017, this property was rezoned RSA5.
So as a result, now that we're requesting to eliminate the ground floor commercial space,
which is no longer required, we have a refusal for the proposed multi-family use of the property,
which already exists, but is prohibited in the RSA 5 zoning district, of course, which is how it was
rezoned. Now, in the simplest of terms, we have a significant hardship because the commercial space
is no longer required, the property is already built as a multifamily dwelling, and the property
cannot be feasibly converted to single-family use at this point. Now, just to elaborate a bit further
Now, just to elaborate a bit further so the board understands how the owner ended up in this predicament, the owner did intend to put the commercial space to commercial use when the structure was built.
so the board understands how the owner ended up in this prediction.
When the structure was under construction, the owner listed the commercial space with a broker on the MLS, and I did include that documentation in the packet at tab 12.
Now, it was listed in June of 2019, so this was well over a year ago, well before COVID hit.
The price was reduced several times over the year until the listing expired.
If you take a look at the photos of the area which I included in the packet,
you'll get a sense why this commercial space was unable to be leased. There are some single
family residential structures east on Mount Vernon. To the west are vacant structures and
large vacant lots, but there's no commercial uses. This is likely why this small property
was rezoned or residential. We do submit this as the least minimum variance as no dimensional
variances are necessary here. Increasing the structure from the already approved two-family
use to a three-family use is well in character with this neighborhood which includes soon-to-be
development right across Mount Vernon right in this vacant lot here for 18 units and another
are diagonal on Haverford, which you can see right here on this vacant lot, which will
be for 40 units. You'll also see those permits in your packet at tab 11. We submit this will
not increase local congestion. Converting this commercial space to residential will
have negligible impact, if any, on the congestion in this area. The proposal will not impair
light and air or negatively impact surrounding properties, given that the property is already
constructed and it does comply with the dimensional requirements of the code. The use of surrounding
properties is residential. We submit that the variance complies in full with the provisions
of section 14-303-80 of the code as is further detailed in my memorandum of law submitted at tab
9. Now with respect to the community, we met with Mantua Civic. Their letter of support is attached
at tab 14 Jamie have you heard all of my testimony here today yes I have and
would you agree my testimony is true and accurate and would you adopt it as if it
were your own I do with that we would ask you grant this this significant
hardship application and if you have any questions we'd be happy to answer them
thank you any questions from the board no no anyone else would like to testify in this
case if so please raise your hand no hands at this time thank you
M-I- I'm sorry Planning Commission good morning David Fecto City Planning Commission Mr. Chairman
and members of the board this property is indicated for residential single-family use in the city's
comprehensive plan we do not believe that allowing the applicant to convert a former storefront into
a residential unit will have an adverse impact on this block accordingly we have no objection to
granting this variance.
Thank you.
MI-2020-000842, 623 North 36th Street, my vote is yes.
My vote is yes.
My vote is yes.
Thank you.
MI-2020-000270, 6615 Ridge Avenue.
i believe mr demarco chair i'm sorry um i have this as having been heard and voted on august 12th
all right so we just pass over them right yes thank you
St. Bernard Street, we have MI-2020-001463, 928 South St. Bernard Street.
Sharon Soletti, again, this is a case that is on remand from the Court of Common Pleas.
I'll let Mr. Boland explain the procedural history, but they were not required to submit
a full exhibit packet.
Thank you.
Good morning, Mr. Boland.
Please identify yourself with a record.
Good morning, Mr. Chairman. Ryan Boland, 1801 Market Street, Philadelphia, PA, 19103.
Good morning, Mr. Chairman.
Ryan Boland, 1801 Market Street.
And it's Ryan, R-Y-A-N, last name B-O-L-A-N-D.
Correct. Thank you.
And do you swear and affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Please proceed.
I'm here today on behalf of the owner of the property and the applicant, G.B. Vestors, LLC.
And as Ms. Saleta said, this is a remand by consent of the parties from the Court of Common Pleas and the Commonwealth Court.
I'll just give you a 30-second overview.
The Zoning Board previously granted a variance for a duplex and relief for the requirement of one off-street parking space per unit.
That decision or those variances were affirmed by the Court of Common Pleas.
It then went up to the Commonwealth Court, and the applicant agreed with the appellant to have this remanded if the duplex was, instead of a duplex, reduced to a single-family home.
The only reason we're here today is because under an RSA 3, for some crazy reason, we're required to have off-street parking.
The only way to do that is to have a driveway, which there aren't any on the street the neighborhood does not want.
So we're here today on remand just for that limited issue.
I would like to move all of my exhibits into evidence.
Everything else relating to the grant of these variances is already included in what I submitted to the board.
I'm happy to go through things in further detail if the board would like.
But I don't think that would be necessary.
Excuse me, Mr. Bolin did also submit revised plans.
Right.
So should you approve this?
three pages how many there's three pages of revised plans
okay all right um does the board have any uh questions or would like to see any of the exhibits
no um this is sharon saleta though the um the revised plans do show a single family home
it might also make sense to add a proviso of saying single-family home only.
Do I need more language than just single-family only?
No, that and revised plans, three pages.
All right. Do we need planning commission on this, Sharon?
I guess they can weigh in if they choose to.
All right, I'll ask.
David, Planning Commission?
Sure, we can do so.
Good morning, David Fecto, City Planning Commission.
Mr. Chairman and members of the board, this property is indicated for residential use in the city's comprehensive plan.
We have no objection to granting this variance.
Thank you.
um mi-2020-001463 928 south st bernard street my vote is yes uh with the following proviso
i'm sorry chair yeah i'm sorry a head just came up i guess in this case i thought i already asked
i apologize yes a couple people now what else would wish to testify in this matter please
Carrie, Nace, Post, are you here for this?
I am. Can you hear me?
Okay. You can be sworn in by the chair.
Ms. Post, please spell your name, full name for the record.
Sure. Attorney Carrie, C-A-R-R-I-E, Nace, N-A-S-E, hyphen, Post, P-O-U-S-T.
Attorney with the law firm of Fox Rothschild.
Address is 2700 Kelly Road, Suite 300, Warrington, PA, 18976.
Here this morning on behalf of the Interested Party, Melissa Johanningsmeyer.
Do you swear and affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
I'm sorry I overlooked you. Please proceed.
No problem. Thank you. Thank you for your time.
I just wanted to go on record indicate that we have worked with the applicant on the revisions
of these plans. Ms. Johanningsmeyer is in support of the variance to reduce the parking that is
required, subject to the provisor that only one single-family home be constructed on this property
and that it be developed per the plans that are before you this morning, specifically that the
front of the house is built flush with the adjacent property located at 930 South St. Bernard Street.
Thank you. Mr. Bowen, I assume that the revised plans address those concerns?
address those concerns correct and they they do mr chairman there's a specific note on the plans
Correct. They do, Mr. Chairman.
that they will verify in the field to ensure that the fronts are equal between 9 30 and 9 28 south
st bernard thank you anyone else who would like to testify in this case if so please yes chair we
have spike spike you can unmute yourself and wait to be sworn in thank you uh please spell your
first and last name identify yourself s-p-i-k-e-a-l-e-x-a-n-d-e-r spike address and your address
924 south saint bernard i just wanted to swear and affirm to tell the truth the whole truth
nothing about the truth? Yes, I do. Please proceed. I just wanted to ask a couple of clarifying
questions. So it sounds as though you have granted that they do not need to require a driveway for
this property. Is that correct? That's what the applicant is requesting. Okay. So, and it will be
just the single family home as well that again is being uh memorialized in the uh revised plan
as and as a proviso okay okay so no garage no driveway single family unit
just wanted to make sure that we have all those things correct considering that we are not
seeing any of the revised plans um being shared with us today
um mr boland testified on their oath to that and and he reiterated that to the previous
uh a person who asked about it as well yeah okay just wanted to make sure that we were
absolutely we have a few neighbors on the phone who wanted to be clear on that so thank you very
much thank you mr boland do you have anything to add i have nothing further mr chairman
anyone else would like to testify in this case if so please raise your hand
no more hands at this time thank you um did i get the planning commission on this one
yes chair you did we did right okay uh mi-2020-001463
928 south st bernard street my vote is yes with the following proviso
single family only
one single family only
and revised plans
three pages approved today
did I leave anything out?
No, that's it.
Yes, with proviso
yes, with proviso
thank you
thank you for your time
I believe that concludes the 9.30 session
yeah nothing else okay any other unfinished business
i don't have anything thank you okay then case we will see everyone back here at two o'clock
okay thank you good afternoon everyone my name is frank de chico i'm the chair of the zoning
board of adjustment i'll be participating in today's hearing along with our board secretary
Mr. Confessor Plez and Mr. James Holloman. Board Administrator Tanya Sunkit and Board Attorney
Sharon Saleta are also in attendance. For those of you who haven't yet participated in one of our
virtual hearings, I'll go through some of the basics of what you can expect. First, we will
be administering oaths to individual participants prior to their testimony. Second, for the benefit
of anyone participating by phone we ask that attorneys and witnesses identify themselves
prior to speaking or testifying. Third we like to advise everyone that this proceeding is being
recorded and that by participating you acknowledge your agreement to be recorded. Fourth anyone
participating by phone if you wish to testify you must raise your hand by hitting star nine
and then star six to unmute yourself i'll repeat for anyone participating by phone
if you wish to testify you must raise your hand by hitting star nine and then star six to unmute
yourself finally to enter an appearance statement call google 267-270-5548 and leave your email
address and the address of the property at issue i'll repeat to enter an appearance statement call
google 267-270-5548 and leave your email address and the address of the property at excuse me and
the address of the property at issue with that being said we can begin but before mr plaza calls
With that being said, we can begin, but before Mr. Plaza calls our first case, we'd like to ask if anyone is requesting a continuance or withdrawal of an appeal listed to be heard this afternoon.
our first case.
If so, please raise your hand.
Charles Richardson you can unmute yourself and speak to a continuance good afternoon Mr. Richardson
identify yourself you're still on the oath from this morning good afternoon Mr. Chair Charles
Richardson from the Office of Councilwoman Cindy Bass, Room 312 City Hall. MI number
2020-000968-4240 North Broad Street spoke with the RCO and neither of us have received
any communication from the applicant and we would like to have this continued.
that's 4240 north broad yes sir this is sharon saletta i also did not receive any exhibits for
this thank you is there an applicant or an attorney present on this case
okay we have the applicant
please identify yourself the applicant spell your first and last name and give us your address
we can't go forward with her for a minute she is not she has an old software and we'll allow her to
speak either way we don't have any material so we're gonna have to continue it I mean she wants
get on record that's fine miss stanley uh you have to unmute yourself ma'am
here we go
a fan it's off now okay i'm sorry
there's a request getting feedback you have a radio or something or television
you have two devices on okay for purposes of this chair i muted her so that you can let her
know what's going on thank you miss stanley there's a request by the councilwoman's office
uh to have this case continued and it's also been uh mentioned by our attorney that she did not
receive the uh your documentation in in due time if you wish to speak to that you'll have to unmute
yourself and spell your first and last name and give us your address miss stanley could you first
turn your volume down a bit and then unmute yourself hello sarah stanley pm volume down
is that better
uh a little bit a little bit more yeah lower please okay how's that a little better i think
let's try it first did you hear did you hear my statement
i can hear you uh tanya try muting her again maybe i can get through
thank you miss stanley there is a request from the councilwoman's office
councilwoman bass's office uh to continue this case uh and there's another issue according to
our counsel, Ms. Sharon Saleta, we have not received
your necessary documentation in order to proceed with this
hearing. Do you understand what I'm saying?
Hold on. Wait, we have to unmute yourself.
Yes, I do. I understand you.
Okay, so this case will be continued. Okay.
Thank you. So MI-2020-000968
4240 North Broad Street is continued.
Any other requests for continuances or withdrawals?
Any other requests for continuances or withdrawals?
No hands up at this time.
However, I do have one for number 11 on your list, 2309 to 13 of Broad Street.
this was previously continued as an attorney moving party and actually scheduled an era so
this will go continue to go forward as attorney moving party okay mi 2020-000801 excuse me 2309-13
north broad street uh it'll attorney moving party
and that's all i have chair thank you what number was that frank number 11 thank you
and uh confessor i'm gonna go uh we got a request to hear uh case number on page number three first
the attorney has another appointment so uh let's go to number three on your list
339 North 11th Street
Alright, I'll read that in
So it's
MI-2020-000284
339 North 11th Street
Thank you
Yvette Benton
Sean are you the attorney
Sean you saw a friend
To tell the truth the whole truth for nothing but the truth
Yes I do
Do you agree to waive the reading of its refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
I do with the only modification to that statement that it's actually no refusal.
It's only a referral for a special exception.
Awesome.
Have you emailed an exhibit packet with the required documents, proof of ownership,
proof of tax compliance, copied the refusal of referral, photos, and plans five days prior
to this hearing?
Yes, I did.
Also, have you met with the RCO and have a letter?
Actually, I have two letters from RCO.
please identify yourself for the record all right thank you very much uh sean whalen here s-e-a-n
last name w-h-a-l-e-n from vintage law on behalf of the owner and applicant
address is six coulter c-o-u-l-t-e-r avenue suite 1000 ardmore pa 19003
And I have what I hope is a nice simple application for you today.
Two more intimate cabaret and cocktail spaces above an existing neighborhood bar.
There are no refusals here.
It is just a special exception because we're seeking to add more than 50 people.
the property is I'm going to go ahead and share my screen
so right now you should be able to see the notice of referral as you can see it's just
one referral because we're seeking to have more than 50 people the property itself oh sorry I
I should say most importantly,
we met with the Philadelphia Chinatown Development Corporation
as the coordinating RCO.
There were actually representatives there
of three other RCOs.
All of them were in support.
Technically the Chinatown Development Corporation
was in non-opposition
and the Callow Hill Neighborhood Association
was in support of the granting of the special proviso.
So the provisos that they had you can see here were indicative. They wanted to make sure that
we were soundproofing both of the upstairs spaces we agreed that we had. They wanted to make sure
there were no complaints about trash. Again the first floor of this building is
uh you're you're freeze up you're frozen location at the property um and they just
wanted us to make sure that we would continue handling it the way we had and we have commercial
cleanup um they also as you'll see in the pictures they wanted to reduce noise on north 11th street
which is uh cowhill street has no residential location um
Callow Hill Street has no residential addresses, but North 11th Street does have a few further
down the block, so they asked that we use our Callow Hill Street entrance and exit for
the building, which we had no problem with.
So going to, here's, the property is right at the corner of North 11th Street and Callow
Hill Street.
it is right across the street from the elevated rail tracks the rail yard is not far away
right across the street is a large dh and trading commercial lumber yard and construction facility
and this as you can see is a large warehouse and industrial use area it is located in an
IRMX district, and therefore is allowed by right, as I stated. Here are some pictures. This is
the main entrance of what you'll go upstairs right from there, and the two facilities will be
here. Here's an image just to show this is an alleyway right to the east of our property.
That's where we have regular trash cans stored. We've never had any kind of dumpster or anything
like that so it's never been an issue again we have commercial trash pickup that has been uh once
a week or in an as needed basis if there was some big event um you can see here we're you know again
the building's not changing four stories just like everything else right across the street is the uh
the rail yard here um here's the access to the trestle in at the other end of our building
um and again this is this is basically what we look at right across the street so
just an extension of the trestle in so this is not going to be an extension of the trestle in
it is uh run by the same owners but they are looking to do two smaller more intimate uh cabaret
and cocktail areas up there um and i will show you you actually got right where i was going
So here's a floor plan of the Trestle Inn. All the access usually comes right here off of
Callow Hill Street. You have the existing bar in an open room here. You know, hopefully when
coronavirus is gone we can finally start having these neighborhood bars open back up again.
In the back you'll see a small lobby ADA lift and a set of stairs. That will take you up to
the second floor you'll go through the hallway this is the first event space for about 50 people
and then there will be another cocktail lounge at the front this is north 11th street and this
is callow hill street on the third floor will be an accessory office space for the owners of the
building who will operate you know they will own both the second floor and the first floor but they
will be operated as separate entities, not meant as overflow space. And this was just some of the
highlights, which is commercial trash collection. They're going to maintain the same public hours,
which are Wednesday through Saturday, 5 p.m. to 2 a.m. No one had any issues with that. We've
installed new sprinklers, new outdoor lighting, security cameras. And, you know, not to belabor
the point but for all these reasons we felt and the community agreed that there were no adverse
impacts to the community and that certainly the proposed use that is presented today was no more
burdensome to the community than any other similarly situated use as would be proposed
and acceptable under a special exception so with that i will stop and i'll happily respond
any questions that the board may have otherwise i will just present uh one of the owners uh mr
ian cross yeah please bring on your owner and then we'll receive these questions all right
miss sunkett if you could just uh bring mr ian cross into the if you can ask him to raise his hand
Oh yes
He's available to unmute and be sworn in
I don't know, can you hear me?
Yeah, I lost the visual
So sir, would you please identify yourself
Name and address
Yes, my name is Ian Cross
Of 339 North 11th Street, Philadelphia
Do you swear to him to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Please proceed.
Yes, Mr. Cross, you are the owner of the property, correct?
Yes, that is correct.
Yes, that is correct.
And you will be in charge of the operations of the building?
And you will be in charge of the operation?
Yes, that is correct.
And you heard all of the statements and testimony that I presented already today?
Yes, I did.
And was everything true and correct to the best of your knowledge and belief?
And would you adopt all of my testimony as your own?
All right.
Thank you very much, Mr. Cross.
uh chairman i would uh offer mr cross or myself for any questions from the board otherwise
we would rest our case thank you questions from the board no no anyone would like to
testify in this case if so please raise your hand no hands at this time thank you planning commission
good afternoon board peter bernard for the planning commission
peter please i'd spell your full name for the record and uh swear you in
p-e-t-e-r b as in boy a as in apple r as in roger n as in nancy a as in apple r as in roger d as in
dog you're swearing for him to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth yes please proceed
this property is indicated for industrial commercial mixed use on the comprehensive plan
we do not feel this will have a negative impact on the community accordingly we have no objection
to the granting of the special exemption thank you let the record also reflect that there's a
letter of non-opposition from councilman scruller mi-2020-000284 339 north 11th street my vote is
yes my vote is yes my vote is yes thank you confess we can go to number one i lost the
visual i'm going to turn off and get back on but if i lose you just proceed okay no problem uh
mi 2020 dash 000 846 93 herman street
The attorney is Henry Clinton Clinton.
Hi Mr. Clinton, you're still on the oath from this morning.
Please identify yourself with the record and proceed.
My name is Henry Clinton, Queen Memorial Building, 1313 South 33rd Street, Philadelphia P.A.
19146.
Thank you.
Confessor.
Do you agree to waive the reading of its refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Also, have you emailed an exhibit packet with the required documents, proof of ownership,
proof of tax compliance, copy of the refusal or referral,
photos and plans five days prior to this hearing?
Yes, I have, Mr. Plaza.
Also, have you met with the RCO and have a letter?
Yes, I do.
Thank you.
Please proceed.
Ms. Sulky, can I share my screen?
Yes, you can, Mr. Clinton.
can everyone see the cover sheet yes we can may i ask that you maximize your screen
better perfect thank you thank you miss honkett uh this is my appearance stage
statement table of contents exhibits A1 through A11. The deed indicating that my client who was
on the call, John Belieu, owns a property through his entity. The architect is also on the call,
Rustin Olver. This is zoning notice notification to the neighbors. This is the refusal. Refusal
concerns mainly the use of the property and the parking, which I'll get into later. This is
proof of our mailings, mailed out 144 letters to various properties in the neighborhood, tax cert,
application. This is the zoning map indicating the odd shape of this particular lot and I'll
tell you why that's important as we move on. We also have a letter of support from the Faith
Community Development Corporation whom we met with on two occasions. Here's a letter of support.
they do ask us to coordinate construction between this project and another project which will be
heard during this session on the same street they also ask us to make sure that we stage the
construction of these two projects if we're approved for both projects and then also they
and then also they ask that we make sure that we contact the neighbors and the near neighbors
I ask that we make sure that we contact the
concerning the roof deck that is on the property and we've agreed to all three of provisos
here's a letter of support no opposition at all
here's some photographs of the property this is an aerial view
shaped somewhat like an L.
It's a corner property.
From what we've been able to tell,
it's been vacant for a long period of time.
Overgrown in some parts.
And here it is again.
What's important here is
this is the property at 93 Herman.
And all the properties
that are in blue are multifamily.
There are some that are for family dwellings
here across the street.
there's some that are two, but it's kind of a blend of single families, which are in the brown
color, as well as multifamily, which are in the blue. And that's why when we met with the community
group, they understood that there were multifamily in the neighborhood. These are the floor plans.
This is the elevation. The elevation was well-received because of the brick,
typical red brick that we see in Philadelphia
and some panel areas above.
Basically, we're asking for a four-family dwelling
in a three-story property.
There's no issues with height.
The refusal, which I'll go back to and explain,
indicates that required parking is four. We have two-car parking for this project.
Also, the LNI examiner pointed out the open space area. We believe that since this is less
than 10%, it's a diminuous variation from the code. And on the setbacks, you really can't set
back the house from the front of Herman Street nor from the side because it's a side lot and to set
the house back eight feet you really have a lot that's buildable at 11 feet which really is not
feasible. So I'm welcome to go through the floor plans with Ruston if the board so desires but
what i would like to do is is have my client adopt my testimony and then
close very briefly are any questions concerning any aspect of the project
not that i'm aware of let's get the your architect on and then we'll uh or your
either the owner or the architect wherever you want
thank you mr chairman mr bill you were you on the call
yes hey inc hi john how are you john have you heard my testimony today hold on henry let's
get his full name please and swear i'm in sure yep uh my name is john bolew
your last name please b-e-a-u-l-i-e-u we're in the firm to tell the truth the whole truth
nothing about the truth? I do. Mr. Clinton, please proceed. Sure. John, you were on this Zoom call
during my presentation, correct? Yes. And if you had the opportunity to testify, would you have
adopted my testimony as your own and as true and correct? Yes. Thank you, John. Mr. Chairman,
this is a residential area. We are in harmony with the bulk of the block on Herman Street,
the 100 block the community supports the project they believe it's viable that it will take away a
long vacant lot that's overgrown we believe it's also in harmony with the code and with that i ask
that the board look kindly upon this application thank you any questions from the board no no
anyone would like to testify in this case if so please raise your hand
here we have charles richardson from the council person's office
good afternoon mr richardson identify yourself with the record you're still under oath from
this morning good afternoon mr chair charles richardson from the office of councilwoman
cindy bass room 312 city hall councilwoman offers support with the adoption of the provisos as
indicated by the rco thank you sharon i didn't get a chance to read through those provisor anything
in there that we could um i just scrolled through the exhibit packet and the tab for the rco letter
is empty henry mr clinton could you please pull that up again sure thank you
there's there's page one can you see that sharon yes
you mentioned something about another project which i don't believe we can
yeah remember you mentioned something about another project which i don't believe we can
is enforceable by us but is there anything in there mr chairman just by way of uh
full disclosure we have another hearing today on the 100 block of herman so when we present it
to the the address is 100 herman so we yeah i saw that 93 we also presented 100 so the community
group did one letter addressing both projects and Ms. Love was concerned that if we're building on
one, you know, use the other for staging and don't do both at the same time because they don't want
Herman Street congested. Okay, understood. All right. I think the first two provisos, because
they relate to the construction process, should probably be a private agreement between the
applicant and the neighbors. Number three. Well that one Sharon. Yes the deck. Yeah we I mean
we presented twice and maybe people in the audience didn't I guess fully understand that
there was a roof deck so on this particular one the request is that we make sure that the adjacent
and properties are aware of the roof deck and we will do that okay all right and the roof deck did
not generate a refusal it's by right it did not miss the letter thank you thank you thank you both
anyone else who would like to testify in this case if so please raise your hand
no hands at this time henry before i read this off uh i think in the interest of time just stay
there we'll do your next case all right okay all right so uh mi-2020-00084693 herman street my
vote is yes my vote is yes my vote is yes thank you very much
do you want me to move to 100 which one is the next one
frankie muted
number 14 page number 14 100 herman street okay calendar number mi 2020 dash 000 809 100 herman
street as you know you're still on the road yes you agree to waive the reading of his refusal
and stipulate to attack her scene?
I do, Mr. Plaza.
Also, have you emailed your exhibit packet
five days prior to this hearing?
Yes, I have.
And you have met with the RCO, correct?
Yes, I have.
Thank you. Please proceed.
Please, I apologize.
May I interrupt?
It was brought to my attention
that the Planning Commission's recommendation...
And you're muted.
chair you're muted
93 herman street planning commission
good afternoon peter bernard for the planning commission
this property is indicated for single family residential use on the comprehensive plan
the application represents an inappropriate overuse not consistent with adopted district
plan or enacted dimensional standards additionally we do not feel this vacant property represents
of hardship accordingly we do not recommend that the requested variance be granted.
MI-2020-00084693 Herman Street my vote is yes. My vote is yes. My vote is yes.
Thank you. Now we can go to 100 Herman Street. Thank you Tanya. Thank you Mr. Chairman.
Ms. Sunkit, I've shared my screen.
Can the board see my new cover sheet?
Yes, Mr. Clinton, it's perfect.
Thank you, Ms. Sunkit.
Again, this is my table of contents, exhibits A1 through A11.
Appearance statement, deed indicating Tower Hill Investments, LLC.
Mr. Bilyeu is still on the line.
He's a principal in this organization.
Notices to all the community.
Again, here's a refusal, which I will address at the end, our mailing to 144 neighbors, tax certification, notice of refusal is very similar to what I just presented at 93.
Again, the issue is parking and use, a little bit different variation here on the open area and parking at the rear.
For whatever reason, the L&I examiner indicated that the 20 feet was required.
We have certainly our yard space is far greater than that.
And again, I'll raise the same issue on the front setback.
And again, I'll raise the same issue on the front setback.
If we set the house back eight feet, it would really be out of character with the other
If we set the house back.
houses on the block.
And this would really shrink the property.
So here's our application for appeal.
Project information sheet, zoning map, indicating 100 Herman Street, right on, again, this is
a corner lot, very wide, 17 feet, six inches, and very deep.
Here is the same letter I presented at 93. As I said to the chairman earlier, when we presented 93, 100 was presented at the same time. And it's basically a duplicative letter. In fact, it's one letter addressing both properties because the provisos have to deal with construction, staging, and congestion on the block.
And there's also that same comment about making the adjacent and neighboring neighbors aware of the rooftop deck, which certainly was presented in the plans on both occasions when we met with faith community development.
Here again is the vote.
And the property we just did was 93 right here.
And this is 100 down the other end of the block.
Again, it's a corner property.
Views are very similar to the other project.
Again, the community did like the brick, did like the paneling at the top, like the elevation, like the fact that we were taking two cars off the street.
And here's an aerial view.
There's 93.
This is 100.
Again, our records indicate it's been a long, vacant lot.
It's in an area where there are multifamily up and down.
Not everyone, I don't want to misrepresent,
but from the plan that Harmon-Dooidge put together,
you can see the blue are multifamily, the brown are single-family.
Elevation is looking at Herman Street and looking in the rear of the property.
And you can see we have the turning radius sample for two parking spots in the back.
We have no issues with height.
Again, more photographs indicating the aerial view of the lot and the adjacent property.
Right now, it's just a cyclone fence around it.
So similar to the last project, I'm going to ask if my client will adopt my testimony, if you can unmute Mr. Belyeux.
John, you're already sworn in, the chairman, sworn you in with regard to 93 Herman.
Again, have you heard my testimony concerning 100 Herman?
And if you had the opportunity to testify, would you be able to adopt it as your own and as true and correct?
So, Mr. Chairman, I'll make similar arguments with regard to this property as 93 Herman.
Again, this is a long, vacant lot, which our records indicate.
The community certainly was well aware of it.
They wanted to see something built on this lot from our understanding.
It's a unique lot in that it's wide.
It's at the corner.
There's plenty of light and air affecting the property.
It's in harmony basically with the block, the 100 block of Herman Street.
As I said, it's a mix of single and multifamily, and it's certainly in harmony with what the community wants and desires in this location.
So with that, I rest. I ask that my exhibits be admitted and that the board consider this application.
We're going to pause for one second.
can anyone hear me now yes chair it's great i'm having technical problems had to go back
out and back in again questions from the board no no anyone else would like to testify in this
case if so please raise your hand we have charles richardson from council
we have charles richardson from council person's office all right mr richardson please identify
yourself with the record you're still under oath charles richardson from the office of
councilwoman cindy bass room 312 city hall councilwoman has no objections as with the last
case as well thank you planning commission good afternoon board peter bernard for the planning
commission this property is indicated for single family residential use on the comprehensive plan
the application represents an inappropriate overuse not consistent with adopted district
plan or enacted dimensional standards additionally we do not feel the vacant property represents a
hardship accordingly we recommend that the requested variance not be granted thank you
MI-2020-000809, 100 Hermann Street. My vote is yes.
My vote is yes.
My vote is yes.
Thank you very much.
Next one up is MI-2020-000082, 7404 Tarsdale Avenue.
good afternoon good afternoon jim uh eastern on the oak do you agree to wait the reading of its
refusal and stipulate to its accuracy i do also have you emailed an exhibit packet with the
required documents, proof of ownership, proof of tax compliance, copy of the refusal or referral,
photos and plans five days prior to this hearing? I have. Also, have you met with the RCO and have
a letter? Yes, we do. Thank you. Please proceed. Please identify yourself for the record. Yes,
thank you. Good afternoon. Zen Jin, Z-H-E-N-J-I-N, 1617 John F. Kennedy Boulevard, Suite 1838,
philadelphia pa 19103 here on behalf of the owner of the property miss rong wong that's spelled r-o-n-g
last name w-a-n-g this is an application to use this property as a takeout ice cream store
i'm going to go ahead and share the information we submitted with the with the board
so for this hearing we have submitted a notice of hearing refusal the community letter in support
from holmesburg association civic tax clearance deed application the project information sheet
photos and plans the refusal indicates that this property is located in a rsa5 residential district
However, this property historically was actually zone C2.
And we believe that at some point the commercial use might have been abandoned, which is why when the rezoning happened, it is zoned to RSA 5.
Toursdale Avenue is an interesting street in that many of the properties are residential,
but at the same time, Toursdale has numerous mixed-use properties as well,
up and down the block in the 7,400 block range.
Because of this, when we met with the community,
they're aware that this particular property has two separate entrances,
and the first floor has been used as various kind of offices or other commercial for some time.
As such, they supported our request for variance in this case to continue to use the first floor space as a commercial type activity.
The properties next to us also, as shown in these pictures attached to the plants, they're also commercial in nature.
So it is not out of the character with the neighborhood.
The design itself is very simple.
A secondary entrance leads to the first floor commercial space.
This will be a takeout only bubble tea ice cream shop.
So there's no cooking on premises, no need for venting.
And the general hours operation would be relatively limited during the middle parts of the day to the end of the day.
My client obviously expects to close by six o'clock, usually at night.
the serving counters inside there's no outside service there it does say ice cream window
counter on the plan however all service will be done in the counter on the inside there's no need
to have a serving window outside the overall project expect to have maybe two to three workers
at most because again it's a small operation and does not require a lot of workers to be involved.
and does not require a lot of workers to be involved.
The space does have its own storage.
It also has trash storage in the back.
So trash will be picked up by commercial pickup.
We don't anticipate any negative impact.
Surveillance camera and lighting
will be placed on the outside.
And as a result of all these factors,
the community issued a letter to not oppose our request
for the variance of takeout restaurant limiting it to the application which is for ice cream shop
as the primary use i'm certainly happy to answer any questions from the board regarding this
application thank you we have a client yes my client should be with us miss rong wang r-o-n-g
last name is w-a-n-g miss wang can you raise your hand on the zoom application
so the administrator can identify you more easily?
You can unmute Ms. Wong and wait to be sworn in.
Hello, can you hear me?
Oh, I'm sorry.
Ms. Wong, do you swear to affirm to tell the truth,
the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
Sorry, just proceed.
Apologies.
Mr. Wong.
Can we have a spelling of the name, please?
Oh, R-O-N-G.
first name last name is w-a-n-g thank you please proceed thank you mr wang you heard my testimony
earlier before the board um and the representations i made can you verify that they're true and
correct and adopted as your own uh please unmute to answer thank you yes thank you
thank you um questions from the board no no anyone else would like to testify in this case
if so please raise your hand
chair no hands at this time thank you planning commission
good afternoon board peter bernard for the planning commission
this property is indicated for residential use on the city plan however given the property's
history and adjacent commercial uses we have no objection to the granting of the variance
thank you mi-2020-000082 7404 torresdale avenue my vote is yes my vote is yes my vote is yes
good luck thank you have a good answer page four and five same block same law firm unless
okay all right mi 2020-000-089 3801 brown street and mi 2020-000-152-3854
Is this Mr. Slepner's case or is it Mr. Mattione or will you be handling
separate case cases separately? I believe this is Mr. Slepner and we've received letters in
opposition from the RCO and Councilwoman Gauthier. Mr. Slepner will you also be
presenting 3854?
counsel on both of them.
ownership is actually
the same on both of them.
Before you go any further, do you swear and affirm
to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
The reason I raise that
is because on our sheets
it has appellant Isaac
Slepner on the 3801
Brown, and then appellant
Marco Mariani on the 3854 so I just want to be clear you'll be representing both applications
I do yes okay thank you okay do you agree to wait the reading of its refusal and stipulate
to its accuracy on both yes okay also have you emailed an exhibit packet with the required
documents proof of ownership proof of tax compliance copy of the refusal or referral
photos and plans five days prior to this hearing? Yes, we did. And have you met with the RCO and
have a letter? We have. Thank you. Please proceed. Okay. Good afternoon, Mr. Chair and members of
the board. Isaac Slepner with Mattione Limited, 100 North Independence Mall West, Suite 5A
Northwest Philadelphia PA 19106 on behalf of 3858 Girard LLC with regard
on behalf of 3858 Girard, LLC, with regard to 3801 Brown Street and 3854 Brown Street.
I guess I'll start, well, I'll start with 3854 Brown Street, and we'll go from there.
So if I may, I'm going to share my screen so that everybody can see the printed materials.
So here we go.
share and there we go nope that's we'll enlarge that uh okay so 3854 brown um is a mid-block
property um exhibit one is our notice of refusal um which was only a use um refusal exhibit two
is our date stamped application for appeal which was sent in in January of
2020 January 2nd I thought it was date stamped it might be a little faint on
here exhibit three are our plans and I'll start with the site I'll start with
the site plan and then I'll move on to the floor plan so our site plan and I'll
enlarge that. Is that visible to everybody? All right. So here to the left is our site plan. You
see 3854 is that shaded area, the one in the center there. Our proposal is to add on to an
existing three-story building, and it is attached to two other homes on the block.
up here is an elevation and as you can see it's an existing three-story with a basement
our proposed addition is at the rear third story and that's kind of called out in the site plan
there. I'm sorry, not an addition. It's a renovation. And as you can see, here's a photograph
of the street view of this side of the house. And then there are some street views up and
down Brown Street. If we scroll, I'm sorry, 3854 Brown floor plan I have here. And I'll
increase the the size. So here's the existing unfinished basement for utility
and storage only. Here's the existing ground floor level with unit one, the
existing second floor level unit two, and the existing third floor level which
would be more of um an efficiency there would be no changes to the exterior of the property only um
to the uh interior plans uh as we move forward here let's we'll look at um my photos my site
photos and i can show you the front and rear of the foot so right here this is a 3854 the red brick
one in the middle. And that was taken very shortly after my client purchased it.
Again, this is 3854 brown. That's a closer up shot of the front. Exhibit 4B are further photos.
These are photos of the rear of the property. This is the rear of 3854. As you can see,
this is the rear of 3854 these are the neighboring properties this is 3856 this red
second story there and that brown wooden fence that's ours at 3854 exhibit 4c are the zoning
notices the orange zoning notices pasted on the front door of the property again pasted on the
front door of the property pasted on the front door of the property and that's the front step
as well. 4D is a fourth poster, orange poster, I believe. So what had happened was this was
the hearing that had gotten interrupted by COVID and the interruption in the zoning board's
business. So those posters were originally from January and February of this year. And then 4D
are the orange posters that were posted in August and September of this year in advance
of this hearing. This is a second orange poster posted at 3854. Here's a third one.
Here's a third one and exhibit five is our project information.
And that was filed.
and that was filed when we filed the appeal on December 30th of 19 and Exhibit 6 is our
affidavit of service back in January when we had noticed by mail several of the neighbors,
I would say about 100 of the neighbors total, which included our letter to the neighbors
regarding the project and the description and our notice of refusal, our list of addresses
noticed. Then we all shut down for a little while, and then we came back and did it again in August.
We have a meeting summary form from February 23rd, and it was against, but as you can see,
It was a narrow vote. It was 13 in favor, 16 against.
And I believe I had, well, I know I have my client here, Eugene Nadevich, who was a principal of 3858 Brown, LLC.
This is the deed. I'm sorry, 3858 Gerard, LLC.
This is the deed that was recorded in favor of my client and was recorded on July 23rd of 19.
He purchased it at a sheriff's sale. It was a sheriff's deed.
um this is the deed to the property in favor of 3858 gerard llc with the all legal description
tax certs exhibit nine is a certificate of tax clearance um from february for 3858 gerard llc
and we've been having some difficulty with the technology recently um with regards to tax
clearances i do have my client eugene natovich on this call with me um as well and i believe that
there are some other local neighbors on here as well. But I would like to call my client,
Eugene Nadevich, to give a bit more testimony on the nature of the project and to adopt my
testimony. Nadevich, please identify yourself for the record. Spell your first and last name.
Eugene Nadevich, E-U-G-E-N-E, last name N-A-Y-D-O-V-I-C-H.
Do you swear in the firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Thank you, Mr. Slepner.
Eugene, if you would, just take the board, and I can call up our plans again.
If you would take the board through what your plans are for the property.
Let me ask you, before you go down that road, let me ask you a question.
Do you have floor interiors, photographs?
Is the property set up as a single family or a two-family dwelling?
Single family.
All right.
It's kind of – there's not much inside.
I just want to make sure of that.
All right.
So the issue that a lot of some of the neighbors had with this property was the third floor addition that we wanted to do,
which, as you can tell in the plans, we got rid of that third floor
and we turned that third floor into a studio apartment
instead of a one-bedroom.
I'm showing the plans right now. Eugene, you probably can see them
if you're on the Zoom. There's the third floor.
Yeah, go ahead.
You want to use the existing footprint of the third floor as a studio.
No extension.
We are not changing the footprint of the building at all,
And that was one of the issues that some of the neighbors had.
Another neighbor had an issue that she voted against and had got a couple of people to vote against the project because she didn't believe me on putting residential units in there.
She tried to convince everyone that I'm putting a bar in there, which I promise is not the case.
And from these units, two of them are going to be able to make low income.
So that studio, I believe we're going to be able to price it in the $650 to $700 a month range.
The second floor, somewhere around the low $800 range, probably at $800.
And the first floor at market rate.
We're not asking for anything else.
Again, so we're not changing the exterior other than, you know, fixing it up and making it look nicer.
We're not extending anything.
The only thing we're doing is just changing the interior of the building.
okay um mr knight of itch or mr slepner the adjacent properties 38 52 and 38 56 are they
single family uh eugene i believe they are single family eugene can probably speak to that
i believe they are
thank you all right um questions from the board
Uh, yes. Did he have pictures? No. Okay. No, I guess that's why I asked him, I don't have any.
And, uh, if I may, just one further question for my client.
Um, Eugene, other than the testimony you just offered to the board, did you hear the
um eugene other than the testimony you just offered to the board did you hear the testimony
that i offered to the board yes i did and do you uh was it true and correct to the best of your
knowledge yes it was and would you adopt it as though you had given it yourself yes um just one
more thing that i want to add is um the building is the complete disrepair and use all new plumbing
all new electrical uh framing and obviously you know nobody's lived there for a very long time
understood but you knew that when you bought it
you were aware of that the condition when you bought okay yeah all right yeah it's just
unfortunately the market based on you know cost of uh fixing it up it would not be possible to
be able to make it anywhere close to low income if i were to make it a single family home
and also by the way 3856 brown which is the one right next to it uh that is a duplex so that one
is a multi-family building to you it's only 3852 brown uh this is single family 3856 brown is a
duplex thank you all right um any other questions from the board no anyone else who would like to
testify in this case please raise your hand at this time um i have two people in the room with
me that would like to testify if that helps identify themselves name and address spell your
full name yeah my name is i'm sorry my name is william smith i said spell my name i can't hear
you you have to speak into the microphone we can't hear you my name is william smith i live
730 north of DeKalb Street.
About a block and a half
from this property here too.
Same as the last one.
Mr. Smith,
you're swearing for him to tell the truth, the whole
truth and nothing but the truth.
Yes, sir, I do. Please proceed.
I'm here in favor of
Mr. Eugene
Nadevich
and I'm here to say I'm not opposed to it.
Anyone else would like to test
please raise your hand here I have from the councilman's office Andrew Goodman
Mr. Goodman good afternoon please identify yourself name spell your full name for the record
Andrew Goodman a-n-d-r-e-w g-o-o-d-m-a-n here representing the office of third district
councilmember Jamie R. Gaudier thank you you swear and affirm to tell the truth the whole truth and
nothing but the truth yes i do please proceed thank you and i i apologize and i see on the
agenda that i got called away um as another no problem no problem so i so i apologize for that
um just here to um kind of affirm what we've submitted verbalize i guess we've submitted on
the written record as well which is that we're standing with the coordinating rco
in opposition to this application. We did work with the RCO to try to coordinate a follow-up
meeting between the applicant and near neighbors. While I was not able to attend that meeting,
our understanding is that a resolution was not reached. Therefore, our previous stance dating
back to after the original RCO meeting stands. We are generally in opposition to applications
like these that go against community-led remapping initiatives. Thank you. Would you happen to have
any knowledge, and I know you were not at the meeting, so if you don't, that's fine,
as to whether any other alternatives or recommendations have been made to reduce
the number of units
or is it basically
the position of the community
a single family only?
And if you don't have any knowledge,
that's fine.
I'm just curious.
I don't.
I'm sorry.
And I know that there was...
Yeah, I do not know
what the residents on that block
stated at that meeting.
So I apologize.
I can't speak to that.
Okay, thank you.
Mr. Chair, if I may clarify.
I think Mr. Goodman is...
possibly confused and i and i understand this confusion because my client has several projects
on this block we did and he was very helpful in coordinating a meeting with us with the neighbors
on with regard to a different project of my clients on this block that had been
3860 brown which is still pending and actually we're coming back to the board next week on that
um i'm also going to be presenting 3801 brown
um but my recollection and mr goodman maybe i'm incorrect here i'm not sure is that this one had
incorrect here i'm not sure is that this one had gone to you know an rco meeting they had gotten
gone to you know and
the vote that they had gotten and you know it's possible that that he did facilitate i i i know
we've been doing a lot of uh back and forth and and conversations with mantua civic and with mr
goodman so um i just wanted to point that out to to clarify and yeah by no means do i mean to
misrepresent anything um as you as you've referenced there's a lot of there's a lot
of pending projects and especially given the fact that it's on the same block i can fully accept
that i might have the incorrect address and i wasn't trying to call mr goodman out on that i
just uh i just want to make sure we were all on the same page here because i i like i said i've
And listen, I'm glad we are because I want to ultimately reach a consensus.
But just so that we're on the same page, you know.
Understood.
Thank you.
Thank you, both of you.
Is there anyone else who would like to testify in this case?
Please raise your hand.
I believe my client mentioned that he had another neighbor with him.
Is that correct?
Yes, that's true.
Please have that person identify him or herself with a record, spell his or her full name and address.
Herman Strother, H-E-R-M-A-N-S-T-R-O-D, H-E-R, 4037 Brown Street.
4037 Brown. Do you swear and affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Please proceed.
Yeah, well, I was just here in favor of the project. They've taken a lot of
blight off of the block and out of the neighborhood, period. So I'm, you know, as well as a lot of
other people who are unable to participate in the Zoom meeting just because of the technology divide,
but they're also in favor of the project. And that's just here to show support.
okay thank you thank you anyone else to testify in this case please raise your hand
no other thank you planning commission
good afternoon board peter bernard for the planning commission
this property is indicated for single family use on the comprehensive plan the applicant has not
demonstrated necessary hardship uh regarding the requirements of the code the application
represents an inappropriate overuse not consistent with adopted district plan accordingly we recommend
that both the requested variance not be granted would you have any knowledge uh whether there
are up beside 3856 brown are there any other multi-families on that block the 3800 unit block
give me two seconds
Most of the housing on the block has a single mail slot.
There are a number of other vacant properties on the block.
Thank you. MI-2020-000152 3854 Brown Street. My vote is yes with the proviso. Maximum two units.
Yes for proviso. Yes for proviso.
Excuse me is that for both properties? No we're going to do 3801 now because 3801 is six units.
i'm sorry okay yeah 3801 quarter my sheet the application is for six units
3803801 is that is that correct
yes it was my mistake no problem no problem thank you no uh good afternoon again uh mr chair members
of the board and you are correct um regarding 3801 brown um isaac slepner again of matione limited
100 north independence mall west suite 5a northwest philadelphia pa 19106 on behalf of
3858 gerard llc owner of 3801 brown street uh and with me um on this zoom is eugene nadevich who
is the principal of 3858-GERRARD-LLC. I will take the board through our documentary exhibits
and then I'll get into the discussion. So I'll share the screen here and we can look at everything.
i'll i'll um share the screen here and and we can can look at everything all right so all right
that's our table of contents this was another one that had been held over due to the whole
shutdown coronavirus and now we're back so here we are um this is our notice of refusal dated
february 11th of 2020 and um i believe i waved and stepped to this reading as well but i just
want to be certain that i did if i didn't i'll read it but if i did we can move on um you do
i did okay thank you then we'll move on uh all right exhibit two is our date stamped application
for appeal of 2 2020 um date stamped see with three our site photo uh our site i'm sorry our
plan. And I believe, well, let me twist this so everybody can see it. Now 3860, I'm sorry,
3801 Brown is a vacant lot. So if you can see, and I'll enlarge it a little bit. If you can see
here, this is our proposed construction right here. And it's vacant. It's not actually attached
two 3803 brown which is an existing two-story and it's there at the corner of 38th and brown
this is brown and then this is uh 38th over here and these are the rears of mostly vacant on 38th
street well there's two existing and some vacant some existing some vacant on 38th and this is a
a side kind of alleyway here. Over here is the elevation. It would be a three-story with basement
and roof deck. This is a current view, current street view here with a large tree-like weed,
I guess you could say. This is 3803, which is a standalone single house. And there's kind of
looking eastward, I'm sorry, westward back on Brown Street, and then the site, Google
map kind of plotting of the site.
I'm going to turn this back so we can see the photographs.
Oh, I turned that completely upside down.
Hang on.
There we go.
Exhibit 4A, these will be site photos, and in fact, that's the photo of the site itself,
and you can see this giant green tree wild tree growing out of there and that grass that's our
site 3801 um and then you can see the rears of the houses on 38th street and that wooden fence
those are the that's the existing um alleyway space the rears of those and then right here
about is the alleyway space or would be future alleyway space this is another another shot of
bars, and you can see the rears of the houses on 38th Street and the proposed alleyway space.
Exhibit 4B is kind of the surrounding neighborhood, and I'll show you that in a second.
So this is looking across Brown Street. This would be, I guess you would call it 3800 Brown
Street, and it's a large green lot lawn that I believe is the side yard of the church. And yes,
There's the church at the other corner of 30th and Brown on 38th Street.
And then this is the other corner of 30th and Brown.
That would be heading eastward.
I'm sorry, not eastward.
That would be the other direction on 38th Street.
um 3803 i believe is is not a single but is a four unit if i am not mistaken i may have been
mistaken earlier uh these are a view of the orange posters that we posted at the site at 3801 brown
um at least 21 days ago there's orange poster photo number one it's posted to a pole at the
end of the uh wooden fence there so it's right there at the sidewalk line there's somebody got
their finger in the shot, but there you can see the orange poster. We got it about as close to
ours as we could without really endangering anybody or obscuring the sign. Exhibit 5 is our,
sorry, bear with me. Exhibit 5 is our project information, and that was printed up and filled
out initially in February when we filed the appeal, so this would have been on February 12th
this year that we filled that out exhibit six is an affidavit of service uh back in
that we filled that out. Exhibit 6 is an affidavit of service back in August.
August 6th we noticed the neighbors by mail and this is our affidavit of service
and with the letter of notice to the neighbors at that time we presented both 3801 and 3860 Brown
which are both projects of my client and I'll get into that detail a little bit again
uh in a minute we also included the notice of refusal and we included the list of neighbors
that we did in fact notice and i would say it was about a hundred or so addresses that were
noticed by mail possibly a few more it's a pretty dense neighborhood over there um exhibit seven
is uh the letter from mantua civic and they did oppose the um the project uh
And this is a letter of explanation of the opposition to the project, and their issues seem to be they're in favor of single family versus multifamily.
They seem to have an issue with the rental rates that my client was going to rent these out at.
He had assured them that if they were able to build six units there, and he'll get a little bit more into this.
But my client had assured the community that three of them, he would be able to make three of them, put them into the affordable housing range,
possibly even the low income housing range, if he were able to build a total of six units.
My client also, the community took issue with my client in hiring out of local community neighbors.
My client often hires local neighbors to work on his projects, both on full time and project bases.
But those were the three real main issues that the local neighbors had had, and that and renting to college students.
And, you know, our response to that was he rents to whoever's going to sign a lease on the place and pay him the rent.
So they did outline their concerns in a letter to the board, which was, I believe, sent over to the board in August in advance of this hearing.
And Exhibit 8 is a copy of the deed.
Again, this was purchased at share of sale, and the deed was recorded on January 15th of 2019
in favor of 3858 Girard, LLC, the current owner of the property.
And this is the deed documents and the tax certs, et cetera.
Here's the legal description.
And Exhibit 9 is a tax clearance for 3858 Girard run on October 8th of this year.
And I do have my client, Eugene Nadevich, and if I may, I would like to present him to adopt the testimony and offer anything else.
Did I miss anything, or did you give us some floor plans?
If I may, I'm going to unshare for a second and pull those up.
So I'm going to unshare this for just a moment, and I'm going to pull those up.
3854 brown, 3801 brown. I'm sorry I appreciate the board's patience on this.
I should have them.
Yeah, thank you.
Eugene, are you there?
Yeah, I'm here.
Do we have floor plans for 3801?
I believe you just went over them.
We have site plans for 3801.
And I believe that on – I believe that if we – let me just double check.
We may. Yeah, my apologies.
I do not see them. We can certainly amend our filing with them.
It's a bit, I mean, you're talking six units and I don't know, we just don't see the layout.
i don't know we just don't see the layout yeah it'd be helpful if we saw the layout
it would be helpful
we saw
and i understand um let me see
because i i could swear that we have had them
If I have them, all right, yeah, I don't see them here.
I don't know how this board can make
a judgment
without seeing what the floor
is on. My client
says he's just sent them over to
me so let me
get those up on the screen
and I can
walk the board through those.
Okay. My apologies for the delay.
all right let me let me fire those up and
here they are
here they are
okay i'm going to return to screen share here and i will show the board these these plans for
3801 Brown Street. So, and I'll enlarge them a little bit more. Now, as my client described,
it's a six-unit proposal. So, you've got your first floor and basement. Each of them would be,
there's three units each to the front and the rear of the stairs, and these stairs are kind
of in the center and divide between the front and rear units here so unit one and unit two
are first floor and basement combined with bedrooms on the ground floor level
with access to the rear yard space and kind of living room areas in the basement level
Um, second floor is, uh, one bedroom on each, uh, is one bedroom on each, uh, side of the stair tower, um, front and, and rear.
And then same for the third floor.
And the third floor has access to the roof deck.
So the first floor and basement, they're bi-level units?
I would actually call my client, Eugene Nadevich, to give a little bit more in-depth description of these plans.
what's the height of the building uh the height would be 38 feet
we did not we did not get a refusal for height yeah just was curious yeah
well no would it be helpful if i uh went over a little bit yeah the question i have is and
and we'll ask the other board members, is the first floor and basement, are they bi-level units?
Yes, it's two bi-level units. The building is actually five feet out of the ground,
so the basement is not really a full basement. It's a partial basement.
This building is actually identical, almost identical, to a building that was approved last week at 712 North 34.
This building also, the trash storage is in the back of the house, not the front of the house,
Even though, like I mentioned last week, we have trash pickup in addition to the city trash pickup.
We do our own trash pickup twice a week in all of our properties.
This building has trash pickup in the rear of the building.
As you can tell, the first little hallway for tenants and private trash companies to be able to get to the trash through both the building and also the alley that's on the side of it.
And the other thing is, so this is 3801 Brown.
3803 Brown is a two-story, four-unit building, so this one is not asking for that much extra.
so this one is not asking for that much extra. We're still under the height requirement. The
roof deck, it's not a roof deck, it's utility access only, the pilot house, that's where we're
going to store all the condensers so that, you know, so it's not allowed for the neighbors,
whatever utilities we can have up there. And again, like Isaac mentioned,
having, you know, layouts like this, it's extremely helpful to be able to have as many of them
low income as possible because a foundation costs as much of the cost, a roof costs as much of the
cost, and at the very least we'll be able to have half of them at the $800 per month price range
thanks to that. And even though the partial basement does not have any sleeping quarters
in it, the sleeping quarters are all on the first floor. So we try to provide the neighborhood with
as many affordable units as possible, but it's very difficult to have $400 a month
in construction apartments. It's just not feasible. All these units, they're going to
have partwood floors. They're going to have full kitchens, bathrooms, HVACs, in-unit washer and
dryers, the work. So we're not skimping out on anything, and we're trying to make it work for
everyone. What is the means of ingress and egress for the basement?
The basement has the egress well at the rear there and then at the front.
In terms of getting down to the basement from being inside, there are stairs in both units going from the first floor level to the basement level.
I get that.
I get that.
Mr. Novotovic, did you say that 3803 is a quadruplex?
Yes, 3803 is a quad.
Thank you.
okay any other questions from the board yes counselor what's the hardship it's new construction
the hardship is known for us to be able to provide any low-income units we need to be
able to have more units in there otherwise because what the community won't ask us to
have as many low-income units as possible if this was a single family house we would not be able to
price it at eight hundred dollars a month it would be a house that would end up costing
four to five hundred thousand um and there's just no way around it because we don't use any federal
funding or state funding we're completely self-funded so in order for us to be able to
provide low-income dwelling units we need extra units per building otherwise it's just not
financially feasible and this would end up being a single family house is going to go for sale for
half a million bucks um this way you know we have six units in there but we don't sell it we keep
everything we have uh we provide as much work as we can to local community which one of the things
that a lot of people in the community do know is for the last seven years in the neighborhood we
had an open door employment policy which if you want a job come to us and we will get you a job
a lot of people in the community do work for us and we try to do whatever we can but having you
know the hardship is it's not feasible to do with a single family you know to have a low income
single family dwelling on a new construction house. So we try to make these units. Sorry.
I understand your analogy you're making as it relates to Mr. Holloman's question,
but you're talking one unit single family versus six. Doesn't necessarily mean that this board
might not consider more than a single family. I think it's the six units.
well this is the six units thing is that adding extra units in the dwelling does not end up
costing that much more per unit so with every extra unit we have that increases the number of
uh in the number of units we can provide to low-income individuals that are affordable
and not at fifteen hundred dollars a month but at eight hundred dollars a month i mean a lot of
these lots were vacant for decades
without any development, and
on 34th Street, on the 700 block
of 34th Street, which is just, I believe,
0.3 miles away, last week
an identical building was approved
because
we had a lot of
support from the community, and this is what they want.
For six units?
Yep. 712 North 34.
Yeah, and identical.
Virtually an identical building.
Remember that. You might be right. I'm not saying you're wrong.
I just don't remember that. Okay.
Any more questions on the board?
And Mr. Chair, if I may just have my client adopt the testimony.
Okay, you can unmute yourself.
I muted you.
Oh, hello.
Yeah, Eugene, you heard all the testimony I offered to the board today?
And you would adopt it as though you were giving it yourself?
And you would adopt it as though you were giving it yourself.
Thank you.
And I also have two people with me right now that support the project as well.
And I believe a couple more were supposed to log in, but they were having technical difficulties.
Anyone else would like to testify in this matter?
Please raise your hand.
uh mr chair my client um mentioned that he had some neighbors with him uh at his location that
would uh want to testify please have them identify themselves their names and addresses
i'm gonna swear them in yes uh can you hear me yes this is william smith again at 7 30 north
to Cobb Street, and I'm here to testify in his favor.
You spoke on the last case as well, correct?
Yes, sir, we did.
So you're still under oath.
Thank you.
Anyone else?
Yep, thank you.
Here I have Andrew Goodman from the Council.
Mr. Goodman, you're still under oath.
Please identify yourself for the record.
Andrew Goodman, G-O-O-D-M-A-N, Office of Third District, Councilmember Jamie Gaudier.
please proceed all right so similar to the similar to the last address we're here to affirm what we
submitted in written testimony which is standing with the coordinating rco in opposition to the
application again this is obviously a kind of a note that we've hit in many previous cases that
have come before the board in terms of when it comes to applications that go against community
led remapping processes with no demonstrable hardship or community benefit um certainly have
no um no qualms with new development um in the area but when it comes to um variations that go
this far against the against the zoning um these decisions should not be made on a property by
property basis so we oppose the application here today thank you anyone else i believe that uh
Mr. Nadevich had one other neighbor that wanted to testify in favor please have him please have
him or her identify themselves for the record go ahead and your address uh 4037 brown street
you testified on the last case yes you're still under oath you're in support of this application
yes very much so all right thank you uh i want to go back a second you said last week this board
approved the six unit and what was that address it's seven one two north 34th
and was there a letter of opposition or support from that from the rco and was it is would you
happen to know if it's the same rco it is the same rco manchua civic association and there was a
letter of support uh for the project i don't recall exactly what the vote was but it was
pretty roundly in support i can resend it if if if you're interested uh yeah i'd like to see that
because i'd like to i'm going to suggest that this board that this record be closed in the
board to render the decision that the next executive session Wednesday the 29th I believe
it is. Chair we do have another person who wishes to speak. Oh sorry about that whoever it is please
identify yourself for the record. I'm Joseph Pickford. You can unmute yourself and wait to
be sworn in. Please identify yourself spell your first and last name. Joseph Pickford J-O-S-E-P-H
P-I-G-F-O-R-D
Your address?
717 North DeKalb Street
And do you swear and affirm to tell the truth
the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Please proceed.
I'm in favor of you, Dean.
Thank you for your time.
Planning Commission.
I'm sorry, Tanya, anyone else?
Andrew Goodman is
um raising his hands again mr goodman yes i i pulled up the different um the rco letters if
that's helpful for the record uh yes so to by point of comparison um these are both seen by
the same coordinating rco mantra civic association the letter for 712 north 34th which is the
a comparable project that was referenced by the applicant.
That vote was 21 in support and four in opposition.
That vote was 21 in support and four in opposition.
And then by means of comparison, the RCO meeting summary from that same RCO for this particular site was 14 in support, 36 in opposition, one abstention.
Okay, I'll try to figure that one out.
All right, thank you.
Thank you very much, Mr. Goodman.
Planning Commission?
Paula, you're muted.
I'm having a dog problem at the moment, so please hold on for one second.
No problem with dogs.
i'm sorry about that my dog decided to talk because he wanted to give an opinion
please identify yourself for the record paula burns with the city planning commission and i
first want to note that the wait one minute paul and let them swear you in oh okay the whole truth
and nothing but the truth i swear thank you please proceed i want to first start out with our
comment that just because there is a case at 34th street that was approved for six units
that doesn't mean that that's a justification for a variance that means there happened to be
six units seven blocks away it doesn't it's not necessarily comparable on lot size on house style
on history of the property so we would ask the board to not consider that as a justification
for a variance now our recommendation this property is indicated for residential use on
city plan and is primarily a single-family use block. The applicant has not demonstrated-
Oh, I just lost you.
Really?
No, we have her.
Can you hear me now?
I can. Can you hear me?
Okay, it sounds like you might be having issues with the service.
Frank, if you can log out, log back in again.
I'll be here.
Sorry about that. I keep-
That's okay. We've had two computer crashes in our agency today.
This is like nonstop today. I heard what you said, something about just because we, whatever, about 34th Street and then I lost you.
Okay. We were starting out that because somebody says six or seven blocks away, there was another case that you granted to six units. That's not a justification for a hardship. That doesn't mean they were comparable. They just happened to be in the same neighborhood.
there could have been a lot of different circumstances.
So we would recommend that the zoning board
not use that as a justification for a variance
on what happens that way.
Each case should be done on its own merit.
So our recommendation though is the property is indicated
for residential use on the city plan
and it's primarily a single family use block.
The applicant has not demonstrated unnecessary hardship
regarding the requirements of the code.
Additionally, the applicant mentioned
that they would be providing affordable housing
as a benefit but they have not entered into a deed restriction with the city nor the community
and there is no guarantee to the community that they will be put in or remain once approved.
There's nothing that's going to say they have to stay affordable.
This is a problem when people say this at the Zoning Board, oh we're putting in affordable,
it's an empty promise to the community in many cases.
The application represents an inappropriate overuse, not consistent with our adopted district
plan and we recommend that both the requested variances not be granted. Thank you and I do
concur. I've said many times in the past we take each case on its own merits. I just was curious
about it with being six units and I wanted to see where it was in proximity to this so I was going
to ask that we hold this the board holds this until Wednesday the 28th at its executive session.
And I would note that that distance of four blocks is farther than an RCO notification requirement, but it's also farther than the state's 500-foot impacted neighbors.
So in both of those cases, it's a bit too far for an option kind of to consider.
I agree, but for my own purposes, I'd just like to see that.
Mr. Slepner, you heard-
I was letting the applicant know that more.
You heard Ms. Brombello talk about the affordable.
I did.
You want some more time to talk to your client about how you can realize some of these issues?
That would be helpful, maybe?
That's fine.
I will definitely convene with my client about that.
I can say that it's likely that he wouldn't be opposed to signing it.
I don't want to commit him here, but I know what my impression is, but I will convene with him.
I did also want to add, again, for the record in this matter, and I discussed it previously in the last matter, but I'll bring it up again so that I'm on record.
and i discussed it previously in the last matter but i'll bring it up again so that i'm on record
mr goodman of the council member's office uh previously we had appeared before the board um
my client myself and mr goodman have been here with regard to another project on this block
and you had ordered that we um meet with mr goodman and meet with the rco and we had contacted
mr goodman on that project uh and he was very helpful in facilitating a couple of meetings
Again, with the RCO leadership and with the near neighbors on the block, I did contact Mr. Goodman yesterday, at the very least, asking if he was able to facilitate something or even if it would have been after this hearing to facilitate something.
um you know i understand mantua is busy and and very busy these days and um you know they seem
to be the next hot neighborhood and i think the mantra was civic we couldn't make our calendars
work so quickly but you know we're certainly open to talking with them again um i in fact
had emailed him at the suggestion of my client so um i just want to go on record as that and
mr goodman has been very helpful he's been great with helping like facilitate these things
so um just well then i mean if you if we if it works then we can continue this case
well um i i you know we had
that's i mean listen that's your call i know it's my call but if you think that there's an
opportunity to have further conversation you know i wouldn't amend this i wouldn't be opposed to it
i don't think my client would be opposed to it um if it if it can help us reach a consensus great i
know what the result had been in the other matter um and you know you're you'll hear a testimony on
that next next tuesday um with regard to all that uh i don't want to you know i don't want to get
too far afield here but they are you know they're the same same developer same blocks and me you
know so that's why i'm bringing it up and mr goodman i i i okay i hear what you're saying
i'm sorry chair i just got confused when we said that we'll hear testimony next tuesday
no i would say i was going to do executive session but then i kind of switched gears and thought
based on the conversation would it make more sense for the developer his attorney
and the community to have any further discussion i don't know if they'll ever come to any agreement
or any changes in the number of units.
But I'm just putting it out there
as a potential further discussion.
And again, as you know,
we don't know what the outcome of that will be.
My client is open to that.
So if that's how you wanted to proceed,
we'll talk to Mr. Goodman
and we'll talk to the RCO chairs.
And understanding that it's a corner property and is directly next door to a quadruplex, I understand that as well. And that's why I think that it might be beneficial to have another go around in terms of having a meeting with the RCO.
So if that's an agreement, I'd say that this hearing for, hold on please, MI-2020-0000893801 Brown Street, this hearing will be resumed.
Do you have a date for us, Tanya?
I would like to give it two weeks.
Whatever works for you, you tell us.
I would say November the 3rd and 9.30 for this one.
all right okay so uh this this hearing will be uh resumed on november the 3rd at 9 30 a.m at
which time we will consider any feedback related to the rco's position and the councilwoman's
position. Okay? Thank you.
Thank you.
I think
Howard Street is next, confessor.
Okay, next one up.
You said
Howard Street
on 17.
MI 2020-000725
North Howard Street.
David Garcia, are you the owner or applicant for this?
Here, I'm sorry.
I couldn't get through.
My apologies.
Yes, this is David Garcia, ID number 54351.
Okay, but are you the attorney?
Okay. But are you the attorney? Yes. Yes, ma'am. I'll promote you to a panelist.
Yes, yes, ma'am.
Can you hold one second?
I'll promote you.
Okay. Mr. Garcia, you've been promoted to a panelist. You can share your screen as necessary
and you can unmute yourself and wait to be sworn in.
Good afternoon, Mr. Garcia.
Please identify yourself with a record name, first and last name, spell your last name.
Good afternoon.
David Garcia, ID number 54351, G-A-R-C-I-A.
I'm here as counsel for the owner and applicant.
Can I hear him?
Excuse me, can you hear him?
A little bit louder.
A little bit louder.
let me just see if I can get closer to the mic maybe you could turn your volume up on your device
that would also help yeah that's what I'm looking to do here let me just get here this is Sharon
can I say that we had a letter of non-opposition from Councilwoman Sanchez on this I'm sorry can
you hear me better now yes okay thank you I just have to keep part of this all right Mr. Garcia
Do you swear and affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Thank you, sir.
Please proceed.
You agree to waive the reading of its refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
That is correct.
I agree.
Also, have you emailed an exhibit packet with the required documents, proof of ownership,
proof of tax compliance, copy of the refusal, or referral, photos, and plans five days prior
to this hearing?
Well, yes, but that was actually emailed August 10th by Mr. Luis Castillo and the applicant.
And have you met with the RCO and have a letter?
I have the RCO letter.
I did not personally meet with them.
I believe Mr. Castillo may have met with them as well as the property owner, Mr. Echotwege,
Laura? I believe we do have a letter of support from the RCO in the file.
Thank you. Let me see if I can do this. I can pull that out.
We have a letter in our file that Sharon identified that.
Okay. If I might proceed, Mr. Chairman.
Please.
Yes, this is a single-family home, a two-story building.
We're appealing a denial of a variance wherein the client wants to reside on the second floor as a single-family dwelling
and operate a grocery with, in addition to the sale of beverages and food, also having takeout food.
and there's an issue here I wanted to bring up so that he wanted us to come off as possibly being
less than candid with the board in the initial applications with a notice of refusal
there was a proviso for a roof mount exhaust quite frankly the plans that were submitted
do not have that exhaust and i think there may have been some confusion this application this
variance that we seek is it's strictly for cold food um there's not going if you look at the plans
and if you look at the symbols on the plans with all the appliance and equipment that is going to
be installed um it's all refrigeration units it's not a stove there's no hot food that's going to
be sold from this location. Mr. Garcia, excuse the interruption. Do you have any exhibits you
can share with us? Yes, let me see if I can pull the plans here that I had. I know that were
submitted. This is Sharon Saleta again. This sounds very familiar to me. Has there already
been a hearing on this matter? No, there was a prior continuance on this matter.
well where was the proviso regarding a roof mounted it was it was on the notice of refusal
okay if you look at it it identified it as three use refusals and it had one zoning refusal
and it indicates a quote with a proviso roof mount exhaust
um and the plants just do not do not have that if i can i'm sorry is my screen coming up
No, we only have a partial letter Z.
Is the, but I'm sorry, is the, is the drawing coming up?
Is the, but I'm sorry, is the, is the.
Mr. Garcia, your internet is open with the screen of the Zoom and other windows that are open.
If you could unshare for the moment, go back to your actual documents that you wish to present
and share, click on that, then click on the green share button.
I'm sorry, how would it be that I could be flipped?
I mean, I have the, I thought I had the documents all loaded up.
Do you have them visible on your desktop at the moment?
Yes, I do.
So you can click on them so that they're open and ready to show, then go down to the share screen button, right?
And once you try to share the screen, those documents should be visible under there to click on and open to present.
This is Sharon Sellette if I can interrupt for a minute I understand now where the proviso
language came from. L&I does not generally impose provisos but they did include a zoning history
that indicates that in 2018 the board granted a variance for a takeout restaurant on the first
floor with single family dwelling above with proviso roof mounted exhaust commercial trash
pickup and that was on August 1st, 2018. That's correct. I'm sorry, the panel, are you seeing
the drawing that I just put up? Ms. Garcia, we see your drawings. However, if you could minimize
your boxes of the Zoom so that it's visible for the whole screen.
So you might see a little minus sign on your boxes of the Zoom. We're seeing those
and is interfering from the board
to view the whole plan.
I hope you didn't hear that.
Okay, I just requested control and I moved the screen so now the board can visibly see
the plant. Okay, we see you now. Are you okay? I'm actually trying to open up my screen.
Okay, Mr. Garcia, I gave you back control now.
Well, that's debatable.
I'm trying to bring in the entire, well, anyhow, I had put the plan up just to show if you
see the symbols on the left side of the plan as I'm scrolling down.
there's no kitchen, there's no stove that's going to be installed or fryer or anything of that sort.
But I just wanted to bring that to the attention because I saw that in the notice of refusal and
these drawings do not include that map that would have been at the very least on this portion of
drawing. We do have support from the RCO, I believe it was indicated before from 42nd
Democratic Ward zoning from Ms. Lindsay. In that report, if I could go through the report itself,
there are photographs which are attached which indicate and demonstrate or show the security
cameras both that will be registered with the city police department once assuming we get the
assuming we get the variance
Again, the first floor, the entire building will be owned by Mr. Leiva.
again the first
There's also tax clearances that have been attached for Leah Grocery Store, which is operated and owned, again, by the building owner, Mr. Etchetteghi.
We also attached the tax clearances for Mr. Etchetteghi himself.
12th the i would ask the board just to go back to the to the rco support letter which indicates
that i'm scrolling down uh or have all the photographs uh of the other property at least
like the exterior portion of the property um we also had approval and that was submitted from the
the Farmore Park Commission as well as the Park Commission.
A deed was also
submitted to demonstrate Mr. Levin's
or Mr. Etchetteghi's ownership.
The one thing we did not submit,
and I didn't know if it was necessary
and I can't submit that and amend it, is the lease.
That being that the grocery store is owned
by Mr. Etchettaggy, for whatever reason, that was not submitted, but to the extent that
you would like it to be submitted, I would certainly do that.
Aaron, is that necessary?
I mean, only if we do.
If we have a copy of the deed, we don't also need the lease.
Thank you.
Well, then I will, if with the board's permission, assuming the variance was granted,
then what I will do is I'll just email it or I'll upload it.
All right.
And I think if you can quickly just summarize,
I think we get an understanding of what you're trying to do here.
As Sharon mentioned, Councilwoman Sanchez, Letter of Mom Opposition.
Correct.
Basically, we just want a variance to allow my client in this case
to operate the grocery store with the sale of cold food and beverages
and use it as a takeout also for cold food only,
and approval of the awning signs,
which again were part of the drawings that were attached,
that would be on the first floor
and bolted in as set forth in the drawings themselves.
And again, the second floor will be occupied
by Mr. Etchotaghi, by his family.
Okay, thank you.
I'm sorry, Chair.
Can we just pause for a second while I discuss with the council?
Hold on one second, sir.
Okay, yes, sir.
This is Sharon Soletta again.
This is very confusing.
This is an existing use.
the takeout restaurant grocery is an existing use. I believe the applicant went in for signage
and a roof deck, but it appears that LNI once again refused the use, though that had already
been approved in 2018 there's also an open area refusal um is i is there construction being done
is this an existing building because i don't know why you would get i think what happened
before my client purchased a property the prior owner had done some so-called improvements on the
property and part of the work that's going to be done here is to um actually do what the proper
permitting so it can be accepted. I think that's what you may you may be referring to. There's
really no major modifications here that are going to take place. So the changes that were made by
the prior owner changed the footprint of the structure? I believe so. I think that's what the
issue was and he did it he did it on his own without any you know without following the
formalities of here but but the i'm sorry that's okay i'm so sorry i have a cat here that keeps
coming up on my keyboard but am i right that the use the takeout restaurant grocery
and single-family dwelling that was all approved in 2018 it's an existing use
I do not believe that the prior use was the restaurant.
I don't believe the grocery store operation has been approved.
So you were adding that and you were adding signage?
Correct, the awning.
correct yawning okay but the two-story addition it's not it's already a two-story building it's
but the two
already so this is a legalization of the two-story i believe so or addition rather i think there was
an addition to that second story the second story had always been there and is the use
it's the roof deck that's referred to in the refusal is that existing or proposed
um that is existing okay and it's only going to be used by the family nobody else
okay so you are legalizing additions and a roof deck that were at it without permits you're
proposing new signage and you are proposing that the retail sale of food beverages and
groceries be added to the existing takeout use is that correct that is correct okay thank you
And I asked, Chair, I'm sorry, if you could indulge me, we have a request from members of the Planning Commission to view pictures of the roof deck and back addition, if that is available.
Let me see.
You know, I do not think it is.
I've been through the photographs.
Can I just ask my client whether or not he has those available?
because i know i have not seen oh there you go i mean i know that's part of the roof but i don't
believe that there's any like a positive there's not any photographs of the um that's seems to me
like nothing it's not new it's not anywhere close to being new unless it's is there the addition was
put on the rear of the property i believe it was a rear part but could i just ask my client sure
let me just
your client on the line sir he should be on the line would he raise his hand if he could let me
just, Mr. Lord, Mr. Tatega, could you raise your hand so we could ask you a question?
Okay, so you're available to unmute yourself. You're going to wait for the cheer to square you
in okay okay hi hi please please please identify yourself spell your first and last name
Davey Chategui Laura
can I just ask my client one question because he's he was supposed to have a train the
the um interpreter there with him um yes um mr chairman uh my client has an interpreter there
for him so what i would ask is just that the interpreter interpret so that let's get the
interpreter on the record name and address uh yes my name is evelyn nunas
can you spell that please first and last name uh e d i l i nunez n u n e z
you swear and affirm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth
yes um mr garcia yes mr etutagi i think the the inquiry for the board or the question
that they had is regarding
to the previous improvements
that were made by the private owner.
Can you interpret that, please?
Mr. Chairman,
I'm sorry.
Mr. Chairman,
would the board allow me
to speak to my client in Spanish
and then I can...
Yes, that'll be fine. Just let us know what you're asking him.
I'm sorry. I'm going to ask him again about the previous construction.
I'm sorry, Chair, but we neglected to swear in the actual client.
Yeah, well, I was... Okay, you got a point there.
I would need their names on the record as well. Thank you.
All right. So, Mr. Garcia, you heard that. Would you give us his name, full name, spell it?
I'll explain to my client what's going on.
Sir Echategui, en este momento lo que vamos a hacer, lo tenemos que juramentar antes que pueda hacer alguna declaración, ¿OK?
Mr. Chairperson, my full name is A-V-D-E-I-V-Y, which is E-C-H-A-U-T-E-G-U-I-L-O-R-A.
Mr. Chairperson, my full name is...
And does he swear to firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
No, dí que sí.
Thank you.
If I may proceed.
Sir Chategui, cuando usted compró la propiedad, usted averiguó que anteriormente había nacido, ha hecho una modificación de construcción, ¿no? Un mejoramiento.
Excuse me, this is Sharon Saleta. We're going to need someone to interpret both
sides of this conversation so that we have a record of it.
Yeah, we need to know the question, Mr. Garcia, and then the response.
You know, Mr. Chairman, if this would make it easy, ask me the question and then I will
ask it to my client and then I'll interpret or give you the answer in English if that's okay.
Okay, is your client, was he the individual who did the addition to the second story?
Does he know what type of, what the construction looked like?
Was it an addition to the rear of the building?
La construcción al edificio.
Fue un trabajo que se le hizo a la parte trasera del edificio.
La verdad no sé, porque cuando yo compré ya estaba todo listo.
He says he really doesn't know because at the time that he purchased the building,
everything was completed.
All right, so really this is a legalization, correct me if I'm wrong.
of a second story edition
correct correct all right and the application
also speaks to the erection of two awning signs
with no copy on the sides of the awning that is correct
all right and it's to be attached to an existing structure
retail sales of food beverages and
groceries within the within an existing takeout restaurant on the first floor and a single family
household living above that is correct excuse me this is sharon salita again i don't know whether
you're able to open it but i have um emailed all of the board members the submission the exhibit
packet that was submitted which includes several photos
um yeah that's the interior okay cheers i have brought up some of the photos that was provided
in the perfect thank you so you can view as you need to all right those are the interior shots
that's correct uh go back one please i just saw what looked like the second floor maybe
a little balcony or something like yeah that's what i'm trying to get to for you
the planning commission can see that right yes
to the rear. Mr. Trevor, can I just ask my client a quick question? Sure. Just let us know what
you're asking him. I'm just going to ask him if there's any, if the condition of the roof,
whether or not the deck has been built, and whether there's any photographs on it.
Yeah, Tandy, the only addition I think I can see a little bit of was towards the rear,
maybe.
I think it comes up better.
Sir Chategui, la parte del segundo piso, el deck, ¿eso ya está construido?
¿Y aquí no hay ninguna foto que se dio de esa parte?
No, I don't have a photo of that part.
No, yo no tengo foto de esa parte.
Mr. Chairman, I just asked my client first of all whether or not the deck is already completed and indicated it was, but he did confirm that no specific photographs of the deck.
Mr. Chairman.
I think we got it. I think we may have it now. I think if we can rotate that, I think we may have that.
there it is i i assume that's what the addition
all right uh does that satisfy the planning commission
and i mean i guess you want you want to know what materials were put on
no i'm not going to be that difficult and what i want to explain is the way the refusal was
written or the application was described that it was going on the second floor and so we were under
the impression that that existing second floor deck or second floor deck was going to be enclosed
with a deck on top of that so we just want the applicant or the attorney to state that is not
happening no that that's not the okay that's not the thank you that clears it up that really does
thank you very much for asking the questions for us. Thank you, Tanya. All right.
You want to ask your client if he adopts your testimony, Mr. Garcia? Yes. Is it my
lo que yo le había dicho, ¿no?
Y aunque usted no habla inglés,
usted entiende inglés, ¿no?
Y todo lo que yo he dicho
acerca del permiso
que usted está exigiendo este día,
si usted hubiera tenido
la oportunidad de testificar,
es exactamente lo que usted había dicho.
Entonces, usted adopta
lo que yo le he representado
a la cámara.
Muy bien.
Ah, yes.
He would adopt the testimony as presented today from me.
Thank you.
Any questions from the board?
Planning Commission.
I'm sorry, we forgot one thing.
You applied for signs?
Awning signs.
That was the awning signs.
We have no objection.
Thank you.
MI-2020-000725, 4861 North Howard Street.
My vote is yes.
My vote is yes.
My vote is yes.
All right, confessor, could you hold off a second?
We have five more cases.
Does our stenographer need a break?
Yes, please.
okay all right let's take a uh 10 minute break please and be back there at uh hello
i thank the board for its passions thank you you're welcome thank you uh it's 10 after so uh
i don't know 25 after it's roughly 15 minutes right 14 minutes 25 after thank you yeah
thank confessor you can continue thank you kindly you got mi 2020-000-040-5350 ogonts avenue
hercules griegos we have someone for ogonts
This is Kate Missimer's case, I believe.
Kate, you've been promoted to panelists.
You can unmute yourself and share your screen as necessary.
Thank you.
Good afternoon.
Good afternoon.
You sworn a firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, for nothing but the truth?
And do you agree to waive the reading of his refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
also have you emailed an exhibit packet with the required documents, proof of ownership,
proof of tax compliance, copy of the refusal or referral photos and plans five days prior to this
hearing? I have. Rick also have you met with the RCO and have a letter? I actually received the
letter while we were sitting on Zoom so I'm not sure if the board has received a copy but I can
share my screen and show you that as well. Yeah we just got it but I think would be helpful to
share it. We're just getting it now. Sure, no problem. So I'll go
ahead and share and get started.
Can everyone see my screen?
can everyone see my screen yes thank you and did you want to swear me in first
we're going to affirm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth
i do thank you kate katherine missimer 1835 market street suite 1400 19103 i'm here this afternoon
on behalf of BSS LaSalle LLC, the equitable owner of the property at 5350 Ogons Avenue.
For those of you that aren't familiar with this property, this is the former National Guard
building. It's an armory building. This is located directly next door to both LaSalle
University and Central High School. The location is a bit important in this case, and I'll share
that as well. What you're looking at now are photos of our posting at the existing building.
This application is for the demolition of the existing building and the new construction of
a self-port storage facility at this site. As you can see, the current building fronts
Ogonth Avenue. These are LaSalle buildings to the rear, and this is Central High School over to the
right. Across from this is the Widener School as well, which you can see here. The aerial
is pretty helpful in this case. This is the site here. This is wooded area to the rear.
These are LaSalle University buildings here, and this is Central High School here.
So we can skip down below the RCO information because we have connected at this point.
This project did trigger CDR, so we went through the CDR process recently.
We adopted some of the CDR committee changes to our plan, and that's why we do have revised
plans today.
In addition to a letter of non-opposition from the community, we do have letters of
support from both LaSalle University as well as Central High School.
Those are in your packets as well.
And this is the community letter that was just received today.
Go ahead.
Can you open that up a little bit more?
Yep, absolutely.
Appreciate it.
Yeah, thank you.
Is that good?
Well, yeah, then you're going to have to scroll over.
Yep, no problem.
So as you can see, a couple comments that they brought up.
They did participate in the CDR process as well, I will note, and we've sort of been in ongoing discussions with them.
A couple of things they want to continue talking about are the signage and the curb cuts.
But they have agreed, given that the facility will not be operable from an office standpoint until after 9 a.m., that their prior concerns about traffic in the rush hour on OGONS aren't really a concern because, again, the office wouldn't be open at that time.
So it's not to open before 9, but was there any mention of closing or the hours that would be operational?
No, but my client is on the line and can speak to that.
I do believe they would end up closing the office around 6 p.m.
Okay, I just was curious because you're saying not before 9, but that leaves it wide open.
Sure. I believe Sandra brought us from a concerned community, maybe on the line,
but her concern was really the morning rush as opposed to the afternoon rush on Ogons Avenue.
Just continue here, some more photos of the site.
As you are all familiar, this site is zoned RSA 3, which is a residential zoning district.
As you can see, this large piece to the north of us is central, this blue piece is LaSalle,
this is LaSalle to the rear, and then this is Worcester Woods Park city-owned property.
Widener Memorial School is across Ogons Avenue, and then there's more parkland here.
We did receive a few refusals in this case, again, because the property is zoned residential.
The biggest issue here is really the use, and this is a textbook undue hardship case.
Because of the armory being at this site, there are environmental restrictions on the
site that currently prevent residential use here.
There are storage tanks below, as well as I believe there's some lead in the soil given
that there was a shooting range here etc in the past. So residential use is not currently
available here. We do think that self-storage as sort of a buffer use, not a very active commercial
site type use, is more appropriate here because again the property has this history and environmental
restrictions on it. Another technical refusal based on the use is the parking refusal. As you're
As you're familiar with self-storage, as they pop up throughout the city, parking calculations are
familiar with self-storage as they pop up throughout the city, parking
based on square footage. Well, for a self-storage use, you don't have the flow of customers coming
in and out during the day as you would a typical commercial use. Therefore, we often find that the
120 parking spaces required would sit vacant for the bulk of the day. So what we're proposing here
is 11 spaces. And again, that's consistent with our experience in other locations. Again,
we did receive a technical refusal for ADA spaces, but that is proportionate to what
we're proposing from our 11 spaces. We did receive refusal for signage at this location,
and you can see that on the renderings here. We're just proposing a monument sign out front
as the building is set back, as well as some wall signage. I can make that bigger so you
on the face of the building, both fronting Ogonts and fronting towards Central High School.
And again, the idea here is that this is a pretty vacant stretch of Ogonts. There's nothing really
between us and Central and us and Worcester Woods on the other side. So to identify this building
in enough time to allow customers to enter, we do anticipate needing signage here.
and then the last refusal is a slight height refusal um we're at 40.5 feet and 38 feet is
permissible in this district because again it's a residential district but if you'll know and i
think the best place to look at this is really the aerial um there's a huge slope at the back
of this site where it slopes down to the property so the height really won't be visible from anyone
LaSalle sits above us, and Central sits to north up Ogance Avenue, so the height's really not going
to be measurable, and again, it's just a slight increase in height due to the slope of the site.
I have with me today Sarah Wuergen from BSS and LaSalle and Beyond Self Storage, as well as
Kevin Pollitt from Studio North, the architecture firm, and Anthony Caponegro from Kimley Horn.
One issue that was raised at CDR was potential traffic along Ogons Avenue. Again, this was a
concern of the RCO as well. We did do a traffic letter. Kinley Horn can speak to that in more
detail if necessary, but their findings are pretty clear that it would be less than a 1% impact on
local traffic. Again, because you're not having customers come in and out throughout the day,
most likely you're having someone rent space, drop off their belongings, and you may not see
them again for another year or however long their lease lasts. So those are the typical
things we've noticed in our experience operating these centers in other locations.
Again, we do not feel like this use would negatively impact the neighborhood. Again,
it's actually a better use, we feel, for this site because it's promoting less traffic than
some more active uses would. Additionally, we don't feel like we interfere with the uses surrounding
us. Again, the surrounding neighbors are LaSalle, Central, and the City of Philadelphia. You have
letters of support from both LaSalle and Central in your packets. And lastly, we do not feel like
we would be a negative impact and out of context with the neighborhood because, again, we're being
responsive to the context around us. We're building into the slope behind us, and we're really not
going to be interfering with the neighboring uses at our site because again we're surrounded
by public land and the two university the university and the high school um i believe
sarah worgen is on the call can she be promoted just to adopt my testimony
Sarah can you raise your hand so they can see you can you hear me yes can you state your name
and address for the record yes my name is Sarah working uh w-e-r-g-i-n address is 4825
Northwest 41st Street, Suite 500, Riverside, Missouri, 64150.
Sarah, have you heard my testimony today?
Let me swear in, please.
Do you swear in, firm, tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Thank you.
Please proceed.
Sarah, have you heard my testimony today?
Would you agree that it is true and correct?
Would you adopt it as your own?
Great.
So we are available if the board should have further questions, but I believe those are all of our exhibits for today.
Thank you. Any questions from the board?
Anyone else would like to testify in this case? If so, please raise your hand.
Here we have Charles Richardson. Charles, you can unmute yourself.
Good afternoon, Mr. Chair and Board.
Good afternoon, Mr. Chair and board.
Good afternoon, Mr. Richardson.
Good afternoon, Mr. Richardson. Please identify yourself. You're still under oath.
Charles Richardson from the Office of Councilwoman Cindy Bass, room 312 City Hall.
Councilwoman has no objections as long as the RCO did give a letter of support this afternoon.
We do have a concern with regard to egress and ingress, though, because of the fact that with Ogons Avenue,
It tends to be a speedway coming down the street, and we would probably suggest that it be a right-hand turn only as far as exiting the property as opposed to trying to cross Ogons Avenue to make a left-hand turn.
They would have to figure out how to do that beyond, but that's the only suggestion that we would give, but there is no opposition to the variances.
Thank you. Was there any discussion about that, Kate, during the RCO meeting?
Well, there wasn't an RCO meeting, but it was raised during CDR as a potential issue. We did
have the traffic letter completed. Is someone from Kinley Horn on the line that can speak to
the impact? I think because the impact here anticipated to be so low from a traffic generation
standpoint, again, you're not having customers coming in and out throughout the day. I don't
believe that that was considered necessary but kimley horn can speak better to that well again
without belaboring the point i think only where that would be accomplished would be for signage
so you know a sign would say no left hand turn or something like that right all right
i'm sorry anyone else tanya i have anthony anthony you can unmute yourself and wait to be sworn in
anthony good afternoon full name spell your name for the record name and address
Good afternoon. My name is Anthony Cappanigro. I am with Kimley Horn and Associates. I'm at 50 South 16th Street.
Could you spell your last name, please?
Yes, sorry. C-A-P-O-N-I-G-R-O.
And you swear to the firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Thank you. Please proceed.
Mr. Chairman, this is our engineer that prepared our traffic letter.
Yes, thank you.
Sure. And to Kate's testimony she provided in regards to our traffic assessment of this property, it's a pretty insignificant impact to the traffic conditions along Oguns Avenue just based on the hours of peak.
A lot of the peak periods for this type of use occur outside of the respective commuter peaks and even after school hour peak times, especially with the restriction on 9 a.m. openings that will occur after school openings.
And then in the afternoon, the peak in the afternoon kind of comes, you know, a little after lunchtime around the 1.30 p.m. time.
And again, that's prior to commuter traffic and prior to school letting out.
So we do feel that, you know, the traffic associated with this project will be very minimal and have a very low impact to the site.
and you know given the the recommendation from the councilwoman's office we can certainly look
into that with our client to see if they have a right turn only uh condition is something that
um you know would be acceptable here or would work well here and and we can look into that a
little further thank you um i do have a question a question kate i'm not sure it's for this 9 a.m
still has me a little bit confused maybe I'm not understanding it it says not no no activity or
operations not prior to 9 a.m well it could be 11 o'clock p.m so I mean I'm just trying to figure
that out wouldn't it be easier if you had some you know I'm just using it as an example no
activity between 8 and 9 a.m or something like that because when you say nothing before 9 a.m
that's oh could be anytime um i think what our intention was that our office wouldn't be open
before 9 a.m it'll be open from 9 to 6 so we're happy to agree to 9 to 6 if that's well if that
works for you again i'm not trying to yeah totally limit you but you understand what i'm saying
because it was kind of for me it was open-ended when you say nothing until 9 a.m it would be again
it's just our office hours okay um all right it'd be nine to six very good all right uh anyone else
have any comments or quite uh excuse me anyone else like to testify in this case if so please
raise your hand sure i have someone with the acca name i believe that's the representative of the
rco sandra brought us yes hello hi good afternoon ma'am please spell your first and last name for
yourself, identify yourself, give us your address. Sandra, S-A-N-D-R-A, Broadus, B-R-O-A-D-U-S.
S-A-N-D-R-A, Broadus, B-R-O-A-D-U-S, representing a concern, Community Association, ACCA.
We are the coordinating RCO for this property.
Address 5801 Ogons Avenue, Philadelphia, PA, 19141.
And do you swear and affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Thank you. Please proceed.
As the coordinating RCO, we did negotiate this variance with our zoning committee in
that aside from the owner who is LaSalle University, who was also the nearest property, there were
only five other addresses to represent the community to review this case. ACCA did review
this before COVID, and we have since reviewed it after the design review. And the biggest concern
is, in fact, the traffic. And your confusion about why we are concerned mostly about the morning
drive is because that stretch of Ogons Avenue is the thoroughfare to the 76 highway which
the entire community going all the way up to Sheltonham Avenue travels down Ogons Avenue
to get to that point and traffic does back up every day under normal conditions for 10
blocks easily as a result of that intersection right there where people are trying to come
in and get to this 76 highway. We are very concerned that the two curb cuts proposed by
this applicant are going to have cars coming in and out of bumper to bumper traffic in the morning
instead of from one location. We've asked that that be something that we that is revisited.
I'm hoping that perhaps this can be entered in as one of the provisos as we move forward
at this point, because I know these conversations kind of disappear after these hearings.
The other thing is we, I'm losing my train of thought. Oh, the sign. The property,
and it was very important during design review, the property has the armory property is on the
historic register. It is considered a part of the community dignity and it is important that
what replaces it is just respects that and it was asked that the signage be reduced so that it is
not so so glaring across the front of the building and that was another thing that we
hope that can be considered um and again as the only voice of representation of the community
in this process um those are the things that we are interested in other than that we have
no objection to the revised proviso plan presented thank you um can i just respond briefly yes please
I'll just respond that we did have the traffic reviewed, and that's why we are sticking with the double entrance,
because it was a concern for a safety perspective that one entrance would cause a backup were someone trying to turn into the facility on Ogons Avenue.
By having the through driveway, we are able to funnel traffic through our site rather than back up onto Ogons.
And with respect to the signage, that's also a safety issue, because again, there's nothing surrounding our site.
So in order to notify people of the location in enough time that they're able to safely turn into the site rather than slam on the brakes the last second, we do need to add signage to the building itself so that it can be seen in enough time to make that turn.
Understood. Thank you.
So I just want to be clear.
So the office hours would be limited 9 a.m. to 6 p.m.?
Correct.
so we would avoid that morning rush yeah yeah i get i get the reason for that i wasn't when
you just said 9 a.m it means understood many many hours before 9 a.m you might understand all right
okay all right any other questions anyone else have any comments please please raise your hand
um this is sandra again hands at this time chair
this is sondra again hands at this time chair
Thank you.
sorry say that again tanya no more hands at this time okay planning commission
chairman and members of the board this property is indicated for residential use on the comprehensive
plan this is paula burns i'm sorry the applicant has indicated that how little traffic this site
will generate and that it appears to make the excessive signage not needed and out of place
next to the high school and a park accordingly we would ask that the wall signs be reduced
in area and height but also give the opportunity to the applicant to create a better designed
entrance which would catch people when they're using gps to get to the site
any recommendations on the size of the signage
we would lean towards uh what would be permitted in a cmx2 district i don't have that number
calculation off the top of my head. Kate, could you add anything to that? Yeah, I mean, the reason
we're receiving a refusal on the signage isn't due to the size. It's actually because we're
zoned residential. So no signage whatsoever is permitted here. The size of the signage actually
hasn't even been reviewed. It's more or less the fact that we're proposing signage at all
is the issue. Understood. All right. MI-2020-0000405350 Ogons Avenue. My vote is yes
with the proviso. Office hours restricted between 9 a.m. and 6 p.m. Yes, with proviso.
Yes, with proviso.
MI 2020-000722, 5900 North 5th Street.
i have no hands for this one is anybody here for fifth street anybody here for five nine zero zero
north 5th street no hands i have hands but i need the hands i will lower them all yeah only
raise your hand if you're here to speak on 5900 north 5th street only the applicant
or the attorney first um this is sharon sletta the attorney i believe is jermaine harris
they did submit I don't have anything exhibits and we've received an RCO letter and non-opposition
and um something from the councilwoman as well I don't have a Jermaine is their attorney
for this case Jermaine Harris is the attorney right but I oh sorry she's asking if he's out
Are you the attorney or presenter for this case?
I'm the pastor of the congregation.
We are expecting that our attorney would be here to speak to this.
Well, why don't we do this, Pastor?
We'll move on to some of the other cases, and we'll come back to you.
We have three other cases here.
We'll come back to you.
So let's go to page number 10.
M-I-2020-000672-3017 Ridge Avenue.
I have Ellen Notkinson.
You've been promoted to panelists.
You can share your screen and wait to be sworn in.
Good afternoon, Mr. Notkinson.
Please identify yourself, spell your name.
Excuse me.
I'm sorry, this is Sharon Soleta, I don't like to interrupt,
but Kate Missimer was, she left too early
or she was taken off too early.
There were actually revised plans
for the last proposal for Ogance Avenue.
So I don't know-
How many pages?
How many pages?
Two pages.
All right, let's go back on the record.
MI-2020-000040-5350
Ogons Avenue.
My vote is yes with the provisos.
Two pages, revised plan, two pages,
approved today,
and office hours limited
to the hours between 9 a.m. and 6 p.m.
Yes, with provisos.
Yes, with provisos.
Did you hear that?
oh they just re-voted it with the revised plans for visor
you're welcome sure
mr knackleton you saw a firm to tell the truth the whole truth for nothing but the truth
Mr. Nackelson, you swear to firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, for nothing but the truth?
Do you agree to wait the reading of its refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Also, have you emailed an exhibit packet with the required documents, proof of ownership,
proof of tax compliance, copy of the refusal of referral, photos, and plans five days prior to the Zune?
I have.
Also, have you met with the RCO and have a letter?
Yes, we do have that.
Thank you. Please identify yourself for the record.
Good afternoon, Mr. Chair, members of the board. My name is Alan Nockamson of Nockamson PC and I'm
here to present 3017 Ridge Avenue. Oh, address for the record is 123 South Broad Street,
Suite 1600, Philadelphia PA 19109. 3017 Ridge Avenue is in the Strawberry section
of Philadelphia. We met with the coordinating RCO and you'll see in my packet that they
provided us a letter of support for this project. As you can see from the illustration or the
rendering, this is an irregular-shaped lot. We're here merely for dimensional purposes. This is an
RM1 property, and we're here because of the irregular-shaped portion of the lot. If you look
at the Notice of Refusal, which is Exhibit 3 of my packet, you'll see that we're here
because the minimum open area is required as 20% at 257.52 square feet, and we're proposing
18.17% at 234 square feet. Given the irregular shape of the lot and to have a functional
floor plan we had to put the the stairs in the middle of the of the floor plan to a point where
to the point where we took as much of the open area as we could but to have a functional layout
if we shortened or increased the open area in any respect we would not have a functional floor plan
the second variance has to do with technical height of the building because of the floor
because our stairs are in the middle and they're wide our pilot house is also wide and because of
the size of the pilot house exceeds over 125 square feet it takes into account the pilot house
as well so technically if you look at the refusal which is exhibit
Well, we can just use this one. It shows that we're required to have 38 feet while proposed
is 46 because they count the pilot house. What do you enlarge those exhibits a little bit?
I had them full. Oh, okay. Let me, let me get, yeah, hold on a second. Let me get out of here
and let me do it, let's do it this way then.
Let's see, maybe this way.
Can you see it better now?
Yeah, maybe one more up if you could.
Yeah, that's fine.
This is more than one up. Is that good?
That's good.
Yeah, so given the size of the pilot house,
as you can see in the refusal,
because we're over 125 square feet
and it's because of the size of the staircases, and it's because the staircases have to be in the
middle. They're accounting for the size of the height of the pilot house, but our height does
not exceed the 38 feet. And, you know, again, just to reiterate, we have a letter of support
from the coordinating RCO. We actually met with them on two separate occasions. The only
The only question they had was the building materials, and we revised our drawings to
include more brick in our building materials.
I mean, it's a pretty straightforward project.
Again, no dimensional variances has more to do with just the irregular shape of the lot.
I have a witness. Yes. Brian Wise, can you virtually raise your hand?
Yes. Hello. Hi. Good afternoon, sir. Please identify yourself for the record. Spell your name.
Good afternoon. Brian Wise, B-R-I-A-N, Wise, W-I-S-E.
and do you swear and affirm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth
yes i do please proceed mr notkins uh mr wise uh you heard everything i stated today correct
Mr. Wise, you heard everything I stated today.
Correct.
And is it true and correct?
Yes, it is.
And do you adopt it as your own testimony?
Yes, I do.
Thank you.
Questions from the board?
Anyone else would like to testify in this case?
If so, please raise your hand.
No hands at this time.
Planning Commission.
Thank you.
planning commission all burns with the city planning commission we have no objection to
the granting of the variance thank you mi-2020-000672 3017 ridge avenue my vote is yes my vote is yes
my vote is yes thank you very much this is sharon saleta um i received a text from
Hilary Emerson telling me that the attorney in the last case, North Fifth Street, is unable
to sign on. He's going to call in, but he won't be able to share her screen.
Okay, we'll do our best. Thank you. Okay. Calendar number MI 2020-000122, 2029 North Randolph Street.
still under oath from this morning or this afternoon rather
good afternoon Mr. Slepner you're still under oath
do you agree to wave the reading of its refusal and stipulate to its accuracy
I do also have you emailed an exhibit packet with the required documents proof of ownership
proof of tax compliance copy of the refusal or referral photos and plans five days prior to this
hearing i have also have you met with the rco and have a letter well uh we did not have a meeting
with the rco and that is going to be part of my testimony today but the rco did uh issue a letter
stating that they were not in opposition excuse me this is sharon's letter we received that letter
They also said they had no problem with the hearing going forward and you making a decision.
We also received a letter of non-opposition from Councilwoman Sanchez.
Thank you.
Thank you, Ms. Saleta, for clarifying.
I have with me somewhere on this Zoom David Badouk, who is one of the principals of DSR
Developers LLC which is the owner of 2029 North Randolph and I'm going to go ahead and share my
screen and get started with our printed materials. So we are here today on 2029 North Randolph Street
and this is our table of contents. Exhibit one is our notice of refusal
and we've just waived and stipulated regarding that exhibit two is our time-stamped appeal
application 2-21-20 appealing the refusal exhibit three are plans and i will show everyone the plans
right now so the proposal i will enlarge these a little bit without making it too cumbersome i'm
going to go to 200% for right now. So up top here you can see the front elevation and rear elevation
and the proposal is for a two-unit property at this location. It's currently an empty lot.
It's three stories with a basement and a roof deck and over here well I'll show you over here
is the site plan and it borders it is a vacant lot which also borders to existing vacant lots
it's on randolph street which is just parallel to fourth germantown and between norris and diamond
and i'll show you the floor plans now so apartment one is the ground level and basement
and the basement contains just living room space.
There's an egress at the rear and a light well
and I guess egress in a pinch at the front.
The first level contains a one-bedroom apartment,
one-bedroom kitchen, and living room space
at the front of the house with access to the rear yard space.
uh the apartment two is the second third floor which contains a two-bedroom apartment
is the second and third floor which contains a two-bedroom apartment with access to the roof deck.
So those are the plans, floor plans and site plans. I'm going to turn this back because I'm
going to show the photographs next. Exhibit four are our photographs of the site first. I'll show
you the photographs of the site and then the photographs of surrounding neighborhood. So this
is 2029 North Randolph currently a boat is there behind a fence uh it's not our client's boat we're
not quite sure whose boat it is um but once uh eventually when we get the building permit we're
going to find out whose boat it is and give it back to them um so this is 2029 North Randolph
as you can see empty someone is storing a boat there not my client not me um this is 2029 this
This is 2031 North Randolph with some other abandoned things, vehicles and personal property upon them.
This is 2029. This is 2027 North Randolph, again, vacant.
You can see a jet ski. There seems to be a theme on this block of North Randolph.
That's a duplicate of the same picture, but that's 2029, 2027.
And you can see on the block behind North Randolph, which is Reese Street,
there's some development going on there a little bit closer to the intersection with Norris Street.
For B, that's looking toward Norris on Randolph Street. There are a couple of houses there. They are occupied. And beyond that are some other vacant properties, which are actually other projects of the same client, which this board has already granted approval to for some variances.
is this appears to be a truck not sure if it's operable this is across Randolph Street and it is
I'm not sure if it was the time of day that it was locked down or just generally locked down this
appears to be an auto garage with something above it but it was locked down at the time that I was
there this is elsewhere across Randolph Street some junkyards and some vacant and then beyond
there you can also see there's some new construction with some roof decks on the next parallel block
which i believe is germantown from that angle this is 20 uh 2039 north randolph which also
has another boat on it uh which is a um another one of my clients properties uh slated for
development beyond that is 2041 randolph which is a house an occupied house um this is 2039 and 2037
randolph um which are vacant uh one of them belongs to my clients and is slated for development
uh that's a look back down randolph street uh towards norris and this is a look up randolph
street towards diamond there are some auto garage uh businesses there on the right the right side on
the right side in this photo uh are some houses um mostly single family but i think there may be
some twin uh duplexes in there um that are occupied and this is another look up uh randolph towards
diamond street and the end of that at the t intersection there is diamond street you see
some houses auto garages and other houses and this is this is 2039 randolph again a boat i don't know
what's with all the boats there isn't much water in this neighborhood uh this is i just wanted to
show the board elsewhere in the neighborhood i want to say this is around third and diamond
our large multi-unit new construction as well. So as you can see, they're not very far off from
here. I turned that completely upside down. Not very far off from here, our multi-unit new
construction as well. Exhibit 4C is our exhibit's photos of the orange poster being posted at
2029 North Randolph on a chain link on a board at least 21 days ago.
This is the orange poster, second one of the orange poster, a third one of the orange poster.
Exhibit 5 is our project information form, and this was filed by me at the time of the
appeal, which was in February, February 10th of 2020.
Exhibit 6 is our affidavit of service from August, August 4th.
It was signed and notarized on August 7th, but on August 4th, we did our notice mailing to all the neighbors, near neighbors, which included our letter.
which included our letter and my clients have as you can see five properties on this block four of
And my clients have, as you can see, five.
which were heard previously by the board and variance is granted this one is being heard today
on that block of randolph street and we included our letter of notice our notice of refusal
and our list of about a hundred or so neighbors to the project who we noticed by mail
And it might be more than 100, as I realize as I keep scrolling.
Exhibit 7 is the – actually are copies of my correspondence with the zoning chairs of NARA Square Community Alliance.
Basically, what had happened was we had had an RCO meeting scheduled for August 12th, and that was why we had noticed the neighbors earlier in August.
we noticed the neighbors we advised them that this meeting was taking place
the RCO advised us that they were going to host a zoom meeting
I'm actually going to go from in reverse
well I put them in reverse chronological so on August 12th we were scheduled
for August 12th at about 6 p.m. and at about 2 p.m. Stephanie Santiago
of Nara Square emailed me copying the other two
zoning chairs of the RCO that they were canceling
the Zoom meeting because of heavy thunderstorms. I emailed back. I said, this creates a number of
problems for me and my clients, including a new mailing requirement and that this would be
prejudicial. I advised the RCO that we were going to go forward with the hearings on these properties
at the time they were scheduled.
I got a third email from Lisa Seguera of NARA Square
who essentially informed us that, you know,
they didn't oppose us going forward with the hearings before the board,
but they were not going to hold a meeting,
but they had no objection to us proceeding,
and that they did not oppose the development itself.
I forwarded all that to Sloan Folks of Councilmember Sanchez's office
And he got back to the board, specifically to Ms. Saleta, with an email of non-opposition from the council member.
So that's when I said we didn't meet with them.
It wasn't quite as simple as we didn't meet with them, but strictly speaking, no, we did not meet with them.
But that's what happened.
And then Exhibit 8 is a copy of the deed.
That was recorded in December of 2019 in favor of DSR Developers, LLC.
And I have one of the principals of that entity on the call with us today, David Badouk.
And you can see the deed here, the legal description, the notary's acknowledgement,
The front page of the deed, the realty transfer tax cert, another realty transfer tax cert, and exhibit nine is our tax clearance, which we ran on October 8th with regard to DSR developers, and they are in tax compliance.
And I have with me on the call, David Badouk of DSR developers. David, are you there?
hello ah there he is okay i'm sorry i didn't uh didn't realize i have to uh unmute me
okay afternoon sir please identify yourself with a record name and address spell your full name
David Badouche, D-A-V-I-D. Badouche is B-A-D-O-U-C-H. My address is 1224 Noork Road, Philadelphia PA 19115.
We're informed to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Thank you, Mr. Slepner.
Yes, thank you. David, did you hear the testimony that I offered to the board today?
Yes, I did.
And was it all true and correct to the best of your knowledge?
Yes, it is.
and would you adopt that testimony
as though you were offering it yourself?
Thank you.
I have nothing further for my client.
Thank you.
Questions from the board?
Anyone else would like to testify in this case?
If so, please raise your hand.
Yes, Chair.
I have Sloan Folks.
Good afternoon again, Mr. Folks.
Good afternoon, Chairman DiCicco, ZBA Board.
Sloan Fuchs, S-L-O-A-N-E, F-S-A-F-I-R-O-L-K-S, Office of Councilwoman Maria Quinonez Sanchez,
Rule 508, City Hall, 19107.
The Councilwoman would like to have this statement written to the record, and it is as follows.
The Councilwoman would like to have...
The applicant and coordinating RCO were scheduled to meet Wednesday, August 12, 2020, but due to unforeseen circumstances, the coordinating RCO canceled the meeting.
Although the applicant has not met with the coordinating RCO and community, they have submitted a letter making the following declaration.
We are requesting that the developer be allowed to continue through the ZBA without a community meeting, while NSCA RCO is neither in favor nor against the mentioned developments on Randolph Street.
We have all completed our best faith actions towards informing the community and attempting to hold a meeting to inform and show the future developments.
In observance of this letter, the Councilwoman is submitting the letter of non-opposition.
Thank you.
Thank you very much.
anyone else to testify in this case please raise your hand no hands chair thank you planning
commission this is paulic burns with the city planning commission uh we have no objection
thank you mi-2020-000122 2029 north randolph street my vote is yes my vote is yes my vote is
yes. Okay, number 13. Excuse me, this is Sharon Saleta. After this, if you could return to
number nine, I believe it is. 5900 NL 5th Street.
This is, I could at least check to see if Mr. Harris is signed.
We've already on number nine. You're asking, is there anyone here for
5900 North 5th Street.
So I thought we were going to hold that to the end, Sharon.
Oh, I'm sorry. That would be fine. Just as long as you call it again.
Yeah, we'll call it. We'll do number 13 and then we'll come back to 9.
Sheldon, the number MI2020-000122
2029 North Randolph Street.
Isaac Slepner, is that him again?
that's the one we just heard yeah we got to do uh 2209 south 63rd i apologize
no problem mi2020-000724 2209 south 63rd street
anyone here for 2209 south 63rd street
that's not right uh tanya i have a number that i assumed was the other person oh four
oh four all right so no no hands are up well i do
i'm sorry stuff going on
Are you here for this case
Please unmute yourself
Phone number 0493
Phone number ending in 0493
You have to unmute yourself
If you're here for 2209 South 63rd Street
Hello. Yes. Oh, yes. I'm sorry. I'm here for 5900 North 5th Street.
All right. Just hang in there. We'll get to you next. 2209 South 63rd. Only anyone who wishes to
testify or I'm sorry, we have an attorney or the applicant for 2209 South 63rd. Please raise your
hand. This is Sharon Saleta. I have no record of having received exhibits. Okay. And no hands are
coming up for this. Thank you. MI-2020-000724-2209 South 63rd Street is continued. Now confession
go to number nine now. MI 2020-000722-5900 North 5th Street.
Hello. Okay you're on now we need please identify yourself spell your full name.
Okay, you're on now.
We need, please identify yourself, spell your full name and address.
Yes, Jermaine Harris.
I'm an attorney for 5900 North 5th Street, Philadelphia, 19120.
And my address is 100 South Broad Street, Suite 1523.
And it's Philly, 19110.
would you please spell your first and last name uh jermaine that's j-e-r-m-a-i-n-e
harris is h-a-r-r-i-s and do you swear and affirm to tell the truth the whole truth and
nothing but the truth i do and do you agree to wait for reading of its refusal and stipulate
to its accuracy we only stipulate to the fact that this is not a refusal but it's for a special
exception okay and have you emailed an exhibit packet with the required documents proof of
ownership proof of tax compliance copy of the refusal or referral photos and plans five days
prior to this one yes i did and have you met with the rco and have a letter yes i do please proceed
okay uh first of all i'd like to apologize i was online on the computer and for some reason
i was having i don't know why i can't uh i could see and hear the whole proceeding for this whole
entire afternoon but for some reason i can't link in no no worries sir no worries just okay all right
so this is uh basically concerning a special exception that we're seeking for uh a school
for a church. And I have what I believe with me is a member of the board, Wayne Geyser,
and also a pastor, I believe, who answered earlier. But what we're looking for is a school
on the first floor. Now, I did submit exhibits which had a floor plan, but essentially we're
talking about 2300 square feet of uh the school it would be for right now uh seven we're talking
about seven children that would be there um and six mr harris i have to interrupt i apologize
do you happen to have any exhibits you can share with us uh how can i how would i be able to
I can be able to do that.
Excuse me, this is Sharon.
Hold on, hold on, please.
This is Sharon Saleta.
I did email some of the exhibits to Tanya.
I don't know if she's able to share the screen.
I can see if I can pull them up.
If you can't, we'll just go on with the oral testimony.
If you're not able to, don't worry about it.
Thank you.
Thank you, Tanya.
Mr. Harris?
Yes, are you able to see the photos?
Could you, is it possible you could give me a second because I'm able to go on to the screen,
but for some reason I can't participate on the screen.
So I could walk through it with you, what we're talking about.
and you can you know what you i think i would get the picture here you can summarize as best
you can that'll be helpful okay so what we've attached is we've attached the uh
the the referral we've also attached the letter of support from gpass which is the community
organization uh greater philadelphia asian social services we've also attached the letter of
non-opposition from the Councilwoman Councilwoman Parker's office as to this
particular project but again what we what we're looking for is a Sunday
school I'm sorry a school or right now we're talking about seven people that
that would be enrolled and we have no opposition and we have community support.
We have no opposition and we have community support and we would ask that you take a look at the photos that shows the layout of the building and the area that we're looking to have the school in.
It needs to be done right now, and if this special exception is approved, then they would be looking to start immediately.
I would certainly open it up to any questions that you may have.
Okay. Do you have any witness you want to put on?
Yes, I do. Mr. Geiser, are you there?
Hello? Is anybody here from 5900 North 5th Street? Hello?
We'll accept you as an officer of court. We'll stipulate that your testimony is accurate
and true and that your client would adopt it. Questions from the board?
no no anyone else who wishes to testify in this matter please raise your hand
i have ruth harley ruth you can unmute yourself and wait to be sworn in
miss harley please identify yourself for the record your name and address spell your full name
Ms. Farley, are you there?
Okay, Chair, I also have Priscilla Strap.
Priscilla Strap?
Hello?
Please identify yourself, your name and address for the record, spell your full name.
my name is priscilla strap p-r-i-s-c-i-l-l-a-s-t-r-a-p-p i am the head of school of
the sofia academy that is hoping to be in this location i don't know why um you can't hear from
the um saint the 5900 people but i'm willing to answer any questions that anybody no problem i
just wanted to i'll just swear you in and then we can move on you swear and affirm to tell the
truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth yes all right uh your attorney uh you heard his
testimony yes i don't know if he's still on mr harris i'm still here i'm gonna ask your client
if she adopts your testimony do you mr do you uh did you hear the testimony that i just presented
to the board yes i did do you adopt and accept that as true as if i were to call you that that
would be the summation of your testimony? Yes, everything was what I understand the 5900 people
want, yes, and we want them. Okay, thank you. All right, anyone else? Yes, we have
Wayne Geyser. Okay. Hello. Hello. Yeah, good afternoon, Wayne. Please identify yourself for
the record name and address. Spell your full name. Good afternoon. My name is Wayne Geyser.
My address is 421 North Sterling Road, Elkins Park.
I'm a member of St. Paul's Lutheran Church Congregation.
Wayne, would you please spell your last name?
G-E-I-S-S-E-R.
Thank you.
Please proceed.
Mr. Geiser, did you hear the summarization that I gave for what was presented to the board?
I did.
Do you have anything that you would like to add that you would want the board members to hear?
Yes, I do.
I want to say that St. Paul's has been at that location for 100 years.
The deed that's included among the exhibits that should have been presented shows that we purchased that land in July of 1920.
20, and we've been continuously at that location for all those 100 years.
St. Paul's has been what I'll call a bastion of that community for that entire 100-year
period of time.
There's been thousands of people that have been members of that congregation over the
period of time.
What we're trying to do is to utilize a portion of our Christian education wing to rent it
to Sophia Academy, which is a small Christian school that currently have seven students,
but they do hope to expand their student population.
their student population. So I want to make it clear that it's not just seven students
So I want to make it clear that it's not just seven students.
that, you know, we're looking to deal with here. There's, excuse me, 2,300 square feet of space.
So you can imagine that's a lot of space for seven students. So we're anticipating some growth over
the next period of time. It is in the former education building that we used, and we still
use it for an education building. To clarify, it's on the ground floor level of the building.
It's not on the second floor as the notice of refusal indicates. That was an error that was
made by the person from L&I who apparently prepared this. But it's on the ground level,
2,300 square feet of space for Sophia Academy, which is set up for kids with special needs at
the high school level and we do have floor plans if you'd like to see those i think we're good
thank you any other anyone else something new and different no no other uh no other evidence
other than the exhibits that's been presented in the testimony thank you planning commission
here we also have hillary emerson from the council i thought hillary was passing us okay hillary
hi good afternoon i'm mr chair members of the board hillary emerson on behalf of councilwoman
cherelle parker we're in a firm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth
i do um yeah just as you saw i had i had uh had email correspondence with mr harris about the
property but didn't put in a formal um letter to the board um the councilwoman is not um opposed
to the proposed use here there's there's fire there's plenty of space um and there are prior
uses um school uses at this property overflow from the local elementary school and such um
we do ask that there be a proviso that um you know within the next six to nine months that
the church obtain a certificate of occupancy because as as um from best we can tell from
l and i records the the current use of the space um is a recreation space not a classroom space
so we just want to make sure all of the the fire code um requirements are being met um but we have
no objection to to this use moving forward thank you very much anyone else that would be all chair
planning commission this follow-up burns with the planning commission this property is indicated for
residential use on the comprehensive plan. Because it has a history of a long-standing
church with what was probably Sunday school classrooms, we have no objection to the granting
of the variance. Thank you. MI 2020-000722, 5900 North 5th Street, my vote is yes with
the proviso. A certificate of occupancy is to be obtained within nine months. Yes with
proviso yes with proviso okay um that concludes the two o'clock list anything left off of the
two o'clock list sharon and endorse tanya no chair we ready for the next all right i'm sorry
did we complete 100 herman street yes it's number 14 sorry yes yep no problem good does anyone need
a break uh yes i'll take a short break okay we'll be back in less 10 minutes we'll be back in 10
minutes thank you okay do we need to wait no my name is frank d chico i'm the chair of the zoning
board of adjustment i'll be participating in today's hearing along with our board secretary
Mr. Confessor Plaza and Board Member Mr. Thomas Holloman. Board Administrator Tanya Sunkit and
Board Attorney Sharon Saleta are also in attendance. For those of you who haven't
yet participated in our virtual hearing, I'll go through some of the basics of what you can expect.
First, we will be administering oaths to individual participants prior to their testimony.
Second, for the benefit of anyone participating by phone, we ask that attorneys and witnesses
identify themselves prior to speaking or testifying. Third, we'd like to advise everyone
that this proceeding is being recorded and that by participating you acknowledge your agreement
to be recorded. Fourth, for anyone participating by phone, if you wish to testify, you must raise
your hand by hitting star nine and then star six to unmute yourself. I'll repeat, for anyone
participating by phone if you wish to testify you must raise your hand by hitting
If you wish to testify, you must raise your hand by hitting star nine and then star six to unmute yourself.
Finally, to enter an appearance statement, call Google 267-270-5548 and leave your email address and the address of the property at issue.
I'll repeat that also.
to enter an appearance statement call google 267-270-5548 and leave your email address
and the address of the property at issue with that said we can begin but before mr plaza calls
the first case we'd like to ask if anyone is requesting a continuance or withdrawal of an
appeal listed for this afternoon's hearing please raise your hand and in the meantime we've been
given notice that on mi-2020-000558 that's number two on our sheet confessor 1455 spark
street is being withdrawn and there's a request for a continuance for mi-2020-000853 231
Shurs Lane, S-H-U-R-S Lane. If anyone, if there's an attorney or an applicant present
for any of those two cases that I called out that you disagree with, a continuance or withdrawal,
please raise your hand. And as I said earlier, if anyone is requesting a continuance or withdrawal,
please raise your hand at this time also. So can we first have anyone for those cases raise their
James Lane and Sparks. Anyone in those cases? Anyone object to continuance or withdrawal?
Okay, now if we can ask for anyone with other continuances or withdrawals, now raise your hands.
We have Joseph Vaccaro.
Yes, good afternoon. Can you hear me?
Yes, please identify yourselves by your name and address. Give us your name and address for the record, please.
Certainly. My name is Joseph Vaccaro, V-A-C-C-A-R-O, attorney ID 83366, address 5918 Torresdale, T-O-R-R-E-S, D-A-L-E Avenue, Philadelphia, 19135, attorney for 2346 North 8th Street. It's number five on your list.
Okay. Do you swear to firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Please proceed.
This is a request for continuance.
Okay. Calendar number MI-2020. That's 000711-2346 North 8th Street. Is anyone objecting to the continuance of that case? If so, please raise your hand.
i have slung folks are you
speaking to this case no ma'am not this case hold on no other hands chair no other hands
anyone else requesting a continuance or withdrawal please raise your hand
okay we have slung folks for
mr folks good afternoon again chairman de chico and yeah i'm sorry please identify yourself you're
you're still sworn in yes sir my name is sloan folks um councilman maria canyones sanchez room
508 City Hall
I have two issues
my first is
we received a letter
from the attorneys
202000
167 West Susquehanna
Street for a withdrawal
of that case
just hold on
request for withdrawal for
167 west susquehanna avenue this is sharon seleta we also received that okay that case is withdrawn
so i'll read it back into the record mi-2020-000139 167 west susquehanna avenue is withdrawn
My second issue is MI-2020-000241-1227.
No, I'm sorry.
That's incorrect.
That's incorrect.
I apologize.
No problem.
MI-2020-000365-1065 East Erie Avenue.
We have not heard from either the coordinating RCO or.
We have not heard from either the coordinating RCO or the representation for the appeal, variance appeal.
If they are here and they met with the RCO, we'd allow that to go on.
But if they're not here and if they haven't met with the RCO, we would request a continuance.
This is Sharon Saleta. The attorney in this matter is Justin Crick.
Mr. Crick available.
Yes, I am. Yes. Members of the board, we did meet with the Juniata Park Civic Association.
Mr. Crick, just may interrupt you for a minute. Would you please identify yourself, spell your first and last name?
Yes. Justin Crick, K-R-I-K. My address is 1500 JFK Boulevard, Suite 630, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, 19102.
And do you swear and affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Please proceed.
Yes, we met with the Juniata Park Civic Association last week, and we did obtain their support at that time.
The head of that RCO did indicate she was aware of our zoning date and indicated that she would send the appropriate letters to both city council's office as well as to the board.
Given the short notice, I believe it was the intent for her to send them directly there.
We would hope that we would not need a continuance, but I can represent that at that meeting, we did have support from the RCO.
Cameron, do we have anything in the file?
It'll take me a minute to find it if we do.
Sure, sure, sure.
Mr. Folks, I know you testified, but I just want to make certain you have not received
anything from the RCO.
Unfortunately, no.
we put a phone call and an email into their uh uh their uh president kate clark last week and this
week um i know she had an operation a while ago i don't know if she is still unwell or has going
undergoing some has some ongoing issues but we'd be we'd be other the counseling would be satisfied
if you would hear the case and hold off until you received a letter from uh the rca thank you this
And Sharon Saleta, I haven't received anything.
Understood.
This is Justin Crick.
I am very willing to go forward and then contact the RCO for their letter of support subsequent, as opposed to postponing this hearing.
We will hear the case.
So, confessor, we'll read this one in.
MI 2020-000365, 1065 East Erie Avenue.
Sir, you swear or firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
So we would have to wait a second.
Oh, okay.
Yes, I am here.
Are we ready, Tony?
Yes, confessor.
You can go forward.
You agree to wait to read in of its refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Mr. Crick?
Yes, members of the board.
Do you agree to wait to read in of its refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
yes i do thank you have you emailed an exhibit packet with the required documents proof of
ownership proof of tax compliance copy of the refusal order for photos and plans five days
prior to this hearing yes i have have you okay you may proceed thank you um members of the board
this is a matter uh involving the property at 1065-71 east erie avenue uh the property is a
bar and basically banquet hall. We are seeking an application for the banquet hall. This is a
referral to include music and live entertainment for more than 50 people. I'm going to share with
you the outline of this case. As with the refusal, referral, I apologize. Basically, this bar, JJ's
uh referral i apologize um basically this bar jj's cafe has been operating in this neighborhood
at this location for uh several years over a decade and more and my client has owned it since
2008 um there is just recently the concern that their ability to have a dj there and some music
has triggered the uh the need for this special license and the and the referral so i just want
to give you some perspective just to go through the documents very briefly. We have the refusal,
which was strictly limited to the special exception approval requirement. The deed will
show you that the property is owned by two individuals, Jose Sanchez and Maria Diaz.
Ms. Diaz is with us today on the call. Following the deed, just to give some perspective,
JJ's Cafe is located at Erie and J Street in the Juniata section of Philadelphia. And from a
satellite view you can see that Erie Avenue is basically a lot of non-residential uses on the
what I believe to be the south side of it and more commercial with residential use behind it
on the north side of Erie based on this layout. Some perspective again is right here the corner
of the property on Erie and across the street from the from the location another angled view
of the street. And then what is more important is I'm about to show you some pictures of the inside
other than the zoning poster right here. So this is the location that we're seeking to put or have
the live music and entertainment, mostly for private banquets, but to allow some of the
patrons to basically hear the live music. Interior photos continue. And if you'll take note,
there's basically a spot right here that I believe the DJ was and or will be going forward.
And then finally, simply a tax clearance certificate for the other owner. The property
seems to be listed under his name and not his spouse's name. But we have met with the RCO.
We've addressed their concerns regarding after hours complaints, which there haven't been any,
but they just wanted to preempt the situation. We have also incorporated security measures to
make sure that we take care of the neighbors with security staff on board. The property
is sufficient to handle the number of people that are requested on the permit
with the license. And again, the only other issue that we had at one point was some parking,
But as we discussed with the neighborhood, we believe there's ample parking up and down Erie Avenue for the project.
There was no opposition and no provisos necessarily placed on at the RCO meeting.
And so we believe that the referral should be granted.
Thank you.
Do you have a question you'd like to put on?
Yes, I do.
Ms. Diaz, if you're available and you're able to speak, or once you're let in.
No one has raised their hand.
I believe she was calling in on a phone.
So I can make sure that she's back around.
She was here at the 3.30.
Ms. Diaz, are you on the call?
We can't hear her.
They have to let you in.
What is the phone number you're calling from?
667-971-1558.
Is there a phone number ending in 1558 on the call?
Been unmuted.
They've been unmuted, okay.
hello just to press star six so yes please press star six to unmute yourself okay can you hear me
now barely you have to speak up so she has to press that on the device that she's using for
the zoom sorry yeah if you can hear this miss diaz please press star six on the device that
you're using for the Zoom call?
I will, what I will do is I can have her on speakerphone at my location, if that may
be acceptable.
hello yes miss diaz good afternoon miss diaz if you can hear me please identify yourself
for the record spell your first and last name
maria diaz m-a-r-i-a-d-i-a-c there's another device that's on that's causing
feedback. We're getting an echo.
Is that better?
I can hear you.
Why don't we do this?
Why don't we make light, please?
As an officer of the court, we'll
stipulate that your client would adopt
your testimony as being true and correct.
All right? Thank you.
All right. Questions from the board?
No. Is there anyone else
who would like to testify in this case
if so please raise your hand no hands at this time thank you planning commission
good evening chair members of the board ian hegarty philadelphia city planning commission
i need to spell you spell your first and last name and swear you in please yes sir ian hegarty i-a-n
H-E-G-A-R-T-Y. Do you swear and affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the
truth? I do. Thank you. Please proceed. All right. Thank you, Chair. This property is indicated for
commercial mixed use in the comprehensive plan. We believe that the proposed use meets the
definition for a use permitted by special exception and further that the proposed use
will not present any of the specific impacts listed in section 14303. Accordingly, we have
no objection to the granting of the special exception. Thank you very much. MI-2020-000365.
Frank, are we holding this one? Yeah, well let me let me go through that. Thank you. MI-2020-000365
1065 through 1071 East Erie Avenue. This hearing will be resumed on, I need a date.
and time um it's only to get the letter from the rco so maybe next wednesday after executive session
tanya would that miss sunkett would that be okay yes works for me that'll be the 28th
october 28th at 9 30 a.m yes at which time we will consider any feedback related to the rco's
position thank you very much i will contact them to send that thank you
The last case, I believe, is Red Lion Road.
I have no record of having received exhibits in that case.
Red Lion Road.
MI 2020-00078842-54 Red Lion Road.
i have no hands ms benton i'm sorry i'm sorry it's a vet jar um anybody have a hand up for
842-54 red lion road no hands no hands are up mi-2020-000078
842-54
Red Lion Road is continued.
I believe that concludes the
330 list.
Yes, it does, Chair.
Anything outstanding business?
Sharon?
Now that's it.
All right, guys.
See you in the morning, everyone.
Good night. Thank you.
We have a second session, right?
tomorrow yes nine o'clock tomorrow