to proceed with this case? Five days in advance of this hearing.
I have. Thank you. Please proceed and share your screen.
Thank you.
just one moment mr chair i'm weeding through
something that shouldn't be up but is up okay let's try now
that didn't work
there it is hiding
mr chair 2409 north 17th street is on a block of a considerable amount of disinvestment uh with
more than a half a dozen vacant lots my client purchased the property it was a complete shell
Well, he ended up building it out as a duplex, thinking that he could, because the property next to him is a duplex, and the property on the other side is a vacant lot, and properties across the street are triplexes.
He thought it was a multifamily block, and so he did build it out.
Here's the first-floor apartment.
As you can see, it's two ample-sized bedrooms and a large backyard, and here's the second-floor apartment.
English is not his first language, and he did not understand the permitting process,
but this is the finished product.
It is empty because he learned when he was attempting to fill the space that it in fact
was not zoned properly.
It does have separate meters.
It was properly posted.
We did meet with Uptown, and 222 individual pieces of mail did go out.
We met with them last week, have not heard from them yet on this case.
But, as I said, 2415 is a duplex.
2413 and 2403 are vacant lots.
We've got 2345 all the way through 51 is vacant.
And then we've got 2429 vacant.
And then triplexes across the street at 2418 and 2416.
As I said, there's lots of disinvestment on the block.
This property was a shell.
A brand new rehab single-family home on this block would be beyond any price point that anyone in the immediate area could occupy.
And given the similarly situated uses on the block, and given the fact that my client inadvertently believed that this could be, in fact, a duplex as a matter of right,
I am asking for forgiveness on this one and to have the appeal granted for the two-family dwelling.
With that, I do have Mr. Wegner here, if he could raise his hand, to be identified.
Mr. Vignette, please unmute yourself and wait for the chair.
Mr. Vignette, could you state your name, please, and spell it for the court reporter?
Hey, hello, my name is George Vignette.
Could you spell your name, please, for the court reporter?
Mr. Vegney?
Yeah, I'm here.
I'm here.
Could you state your name, please, and spell for the court reporter?
My name is George Vegney.
First name G-E-O-R-G-E-S.
First name G-E-O-R-G-E-S.
Last name B-E-G-E-S.
Last name B-E-G-N-E.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Proceed, counsel.
Thank you.
Mr. Vigni, did you hear my presentation to the board this morning?
Yes, I did.
Is it true and accurate to the best of your knowledge?
Do you adopt it as your own testimony?
Thank you.
I have nothing further, Mr. Chair.
Questions from the board.
No, Mr. Chairman.
No, Mr. Chairman.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
Yes, Chair.
I have a person with the last name Wendley.
Good morning.
Could you state your name, please, and spell for the court reporter?
My name is Kizwana Wendley.
It's K-Y-Z-W-A-H-N-A.
Last name is W-I-N-D-L-E-Y.
Right.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Are you a neighbor?
I'm actually a tenant.
Okay, proceed.
I was just trying to figure out exactly what the process will be here, because I do live on the second floor.
So I'm just trying to figure out exactly, you know, what I would need to do for if there's anything I need to do for this, in this process.
Mr. Chair, I could explain after the hearing to the one tenant in the building.
Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Well, we, we will, we will follow up and see what's going on with
that. Okay. In a short period of time, but thank you for calling in. We appreciate it.
Is there anyone else in the virtual audience? I see no hands, Chair.
Before I go to planning commission, uh, counsel, could you respond to that?
Respond to what, Mr. Mr. Chairman? The tenant. What the tenant? Oh, sure. Uh,
yes again uh when my client went through the process of legalizing the two family for two
units he learned that it was not legally zoned for such so that it is vacant uh with respect to
the second unit uh the client can stay there and until the disposition of this case okay thank you
Planning Commissioner Chair. Yes. Mr. Kelly. I'm sorry, Chair. I had an unstable Internet connection. Okay. If I could ask Mr. Anastasio to go back to. No, certainly. He will gladly do that.
The last thing I heard was he learned that.
Yeah, he learned that he could not occupy both units and rent them as such.
And therefore, the one tenant in the building can remain there until the disposition of this case.
Okay, John.
Yes, Chair, thank you.
Thank you.
Planning Commission.
Thank you, Chair Bergman and board members.
David Fecto with the City Planning Commission. In 2014, the zoning map was amended from
residential multifamily to residential single-family at this location in accord with
recommendations from the comprehensive plan. There is no unique physical condition or circumstance
of this property that would prevent it from being used in conformance with the zoning code.
The City Planning Commission recommends the board deny the use variance for two dwelling units.
Thank you. Just for the record, the practical uses on the block still reflect 2014.
multifamily. Thank you. Hillary, we don't have a letter and do we have an issue with taxes too?
Yes, we do not have a letter outstanding taxes owed from 2022. Mr. Anastasio, I emailed you
about that yesterday. So we can't, we need to, okay, we need to, we have to hold our vote to
the taxes are resolved and we should, we can also hold for the RCO letter. Mr. Trey, I recommend
two weeks? That's fine with me. We'll try to give you a date in two weeks, Vern, okay? That'll be
fine. I believe Uptown will be forthcoming. It just was, we met with them late, so. All right,
good. Thank you very much. So, Mr. Chero, at this time, we'll plan to vote on this. Actually, I
believe, would it be, Lakeisha, next, in two weeks, actually, we don't have hearings. Would it be
june 7th there'll be our next hearing date after that yes june 7th okay so we'll vote on this at
june 7th at 9 30 it's closed except for the letter am i right hillary and the taxes yes thank you
thank you number two mi 2022 006 996 1400 south a street zen jin is the attorney
letter of non-opposition from passion square civic association based on revised plans letter
Square Civic Association, based on revised plans.
Letter of non-opposition from Council Member Squilla.
Mr. Jin has been promoted to panelists.
Good morning.
Good morning, Council.
Could you state your name, please, and spell for the court reporter?
Yes, my name is 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.
Great. Do you swear or firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Could you identify your client in relationship to the property?
Certainly. My client is Mr. Man K. Wong and his wife, NGHI, THI Lam. Mr. Wong should be here
today with us.
Okay, thank you. And our vice chair has just a few questions, sir.
Good morning, counsel. Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Have you emailed in all the required documents and exhibits that are needed to proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing?
I have.
Thank you. Please proceed and share your screen.
Thank you. I'm going to share with the board what was previously submitted on this application.
There's one supplement which we made by email to Ms. Emerson, which is the change on the plans for stamping purposes.
There's a specific form we forgot to attach with the original submission.
So the application here is a refusal based on a RSA 5 zoning district.
My client actually wants to use the property as a two-family dwelling above a commercial space.
The refusals include both dimensional and use refusal.
However, after meeting with the RCO, my client has made changes to the dimensional requirements,
thus essentially eliminating the 80% requirement refusal from the 100%.
We reduced the upper floors back to the 80%, which now would make this refusal a moot refusal.
the rear wall minimum yard depth, because we are now keeping what is in the existing
condition, so this additional rear wall refusal would also not apply.
So really what we're here for is for the use refusals where more than one principal
use is being requested and a two-family household living.
The RCO requested that the six foot seven from the upper floor would be placed into our plans of making the changes to the building, which was agreed to and plans were adjusted accordingly.
This is a three-story corner structure. And one thing I want to jump to to kind of give a little better history of the property is that for as long as my client has owned the property, he's a former postal worker who has invested in this property as kind of his nest egg.
for as long as he's owned it, it's always been billed to him and shown to him as a multifamily
property. In fact, his trash collection, his property notices has always been multifamily.
At some point, he believed because he wanted, he was having problems with finances, he went to the
city and asked for less reduction in the rental license. And I believe that's possibly what
triggered the RSA 5, which eventually led to this refusal. Essentially, the property is not set up
as a single family property. It has been used as a multifamily for as long as he's owned it.
What he wants to do, though, is to clean up the property structures with this proposal and this
investment that he plans to make. What my client would like to do is to do a reduced addition on
the second and third floor, which keeps the required open space on the upper floors.
And basically, I'm going to zoom in to make it easier for the board to see what my client is
requesting. And essentially, adding a residential, having the residential entry now would be able to
have a stairway that leads directly up. As it sits now, the property's stairs come in through the
front and goes up through the building. By doing this, he essentially gives the upper floors,
apartments, a nicer layout space and allows it to be used as a more open apartment. Plus,
he's had inquiries regarding commercial use as a nail salon on the first floor.
because he's on the corner and the diagonally across both streets,
Diagonally across both streets, across the street corners are also used in a commercial format.
across the street corners are also.
He thought that it would make sense to have the property set up with the commercial space on the first floor.
When we met with the RCO, originally, this would have been 100% coverage.
This extension would have came all the way to here.
And because of that, the RCO said that is too much additional coverage.
please set it back to the six foot seven that would be required. And we agreed to do that.
Due to that, the interior layout has a little bit of a change in the look. However, the interior
layout essentially is the same. The real goal of the extension here is for the staircase. This is
what really helps make the space much more usable and is laid out much better. The existing first
floor rear is going to be used for trash storage room, allowing all three units to have trash
storage in the back with two storages for the commercial because they probably will
have a little more trash. And the rest would be essentially two apartments above. They're
essentially one-bedroom units with an increased and better setup for the living area. Before,
because of the staircase running up this way, it will make it very difficult for him to have
a nicer layout for the upper floor apartment. So these are all the changes. Essentially,
for zoning purposes, the site, we're asking the board to review and stamp the site plan
and the addition plan for the elevation and side view.
But my client is seeking basically use changes at this point
based on the prior existing use and prior knowledge,
as far as he knows, as multifamily property
and the fact that it would, in essence,
match what is already on the other corners of this area.
So that is why we're asking for the board's favorable review of this particular application and request for change of use.
I'm happy to show the board any specific part of the exhibits, and I believe my client is here to verify my testimony.
Let me bring your client on.
Mr. Wong, can you please raise your hand virtually to be identified?
do you see your hand raised yes he's there okay thank you sir could you state your name please
and spell for the court reporter yes my name is manki wong my first name is m-a-n my last name
is w-o-n-g right do you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth
Yes, I do.
Proceed, counsel.
Thank you.
Mr. Wang, were you present during my presentation to the zoning board?
Did you hear and see my presentation to the board, and can you verify that it is true and correct and adopted as your own testimony?
Yes, that's all true.