Good morning.
Good morning. Could you state your name, please, and spell for the court reporter?
Could you state your name, please, and spell for the court reporter?
Hi there. My name is Dan Wilkes.
D-A-N-W-I-L-K-S.
Right. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Are you a neighbor, sir?
Yes, I am.
Okay. Proceed.
I do not object to the proposal of the three-family dwelling.
Okay. And do you live on the block?
Are you active in the RCO?
I'm sorry.
Are you active in the community group?
Not so active, but yeah, I attend some of the meetings.
All right.
And you're in favor of this?
Yes, I am.
All right.
Thank you.
Thank you very much for calling in.
Is there anyone else in the virtual audience?
Yes, Chair.
I have Alex G in the audience.
hello hi good morning could you state your name please and spell for the court reporter
yes my name is Moana Delias
spelled please m-o-h-a-n-a-d-e-l-i-a-s all right do you swear or affirm to tell the truth the
whole truth nothing but the truth yes sir are you a relative yes okay uh proceed with your testimony
Yes, I do not object.
Okay, and you live on the block?
All right, thank you.
Is there anyone else in the virtual audience?
I see no hands, Chair.
Planning Commission.
Thank you, Chair Bergman.
David Fechter with the City Planning Commission.
Mr. Chairman and Board members, the comprehensive plan recommends no change to the residential single-family zoning at this location.
this property has a documented history of use as three dwelling units the city planning commission
recommends the board grant the use variance for three dwelling units okay hillary why don't why
don't we hold this until we go over everything we'll vote on it next week is is that okay
that's fine mr chair all right so so we're going to continue this to uh next wednesday at 9 30 we're
going to vote it'll just give us some time to go everything that you sent in to make sure we have
everything okay yes sir um i just want you just want to be sure is that the two things that i just
sent i resend them again okay good good good good well we'll vote on it next tuesday okay
all right all right thank you thank you sir all right okay um all right number 15 mi 2022
22-007-127-606 Pine Street. Alan Nockamson is the attorney. Also, Paul Bonnig is involved as
representing Society Hill Civic Association. There's a letter of opposition from Society
Hill Civic, and there's also a letter of opposition from Council Member Squilla. Mr. Nockamson?
Yes, good morning, Mr. Chair. Could you state your name for the record
and spell it, please? Yes, Alan, A-L-A-N, last name
N-O-C-H-U-M-S-O-N. Do you
swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth? I do.
Just about Bonnie on the phone, please, Bonnie.
Yes, good morning, Mr. Chair. Good morning, Counsel. Could you just
state your name and spell it, please, for the court reporter? Yes, Paul Bonney,
b-o-n-i right do you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth
i do thank you and i'm here representing society okay mr knockamson could you identify your client
and their relationship to the property yeah my clients are dale frank and elizabeth hexner
they're the owners of the property they've owned the property since 2004
okay our vice chair has just a few questions
Good morning, counsel. Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to a
diagnosis? I do. Have you emailed in all the required documents and exhibits that are needed
to proceed with this case in advance of this hearing? Yes, we have. Thank you. Please proceed
to share your screen. Thank you. So I'm here to present 606 Pine Street. This
This matter was actually presented to the Zoning Board of Adjustment almost 20 years ago.
So what we're seeking to do here is exactly what was proposed 20 years ago and approved
by the CBA and also supported by the Society Hill Group, as well as the City Council member
at the time, the Chico.
the Chico. We're going to go through our presentation materials. We're going to go over
We're going to go through our presentation materials.
So we're going to go over the neurodistrictions.
the notice of refusal, the participants we received this time from the Society Health Association,
letters of support from nearby neighbors. We also included some of the materials that Mr. Bonney
provided the board to kind of go through some of the opposition that some of the nearby neighbors
have um and to explain you know why we think their opposition uh should not be considered
a notice a decision from almost 20 years ago where this same board granted uh the same variance
requests um and also uh supporting materials to that as well to get kind of get flavors while
we're seeking um what we're offering is not out of character uh to the nearby neighborhoods in
terms of off-street parking. So we did a candidacy on the neighborhoods nearby, and we have pictures
of nearby RSA-5 off-street parking, which is the request that's being requested today of this board.
Maps of the area, photographs of the property in the surrounding area. Our plans and drawings,
including the turning radius specific to our compact car, which is a Volkswagen Golf.
Our RCO meeting notice, I will say that we did meet with the community, but we met in the early afternoon.
I don't know how, if that skewed, you know, the vote in any way, you know, which is not common to meet, you know, until after five o'clock.
Our application for appeal, our deeds for the property, and our certificate of tax plans.
At the conclusion of my presentation, either Elizabeth or Dale will virtually raise their hand
and adopt my testimony as their own, and we will take any questions from the board.
So this is a refusal. We're not trying to increase the density in any way.
All we're trying to do is have off-street parking, and you'll see from our photographs
of the surrounding area. It's not uncommon. And also you'll see that from maps that we are on
Pine Street, 606 Pine Street, our property goes from Pine to Waverly Street. And we're asking
to allow for a curb cut that was previously approved by the CBA, which was never effectuated
after that hearing. But we're not trying to propose where we're putting a curb cut,
where we're taking a parking spot off of the street.
So it's not a zero-sum game.
It's exactly what you would think of what this board has approved in the past,
where there's no public parking allowed on that side of the street.
We're in Society Hill, and like most areas of Philadelphia, parking is at a premium.
So we're taking a parking spot off the street and no negative detriment to the public as a whole.
And, you know, our refusals are essentially just because of the off-street parking.
Now, we did meet with the Society Hill Civic Association.
Again, our meeting was at 3 o'clock, I believe 3 o'clock in the afternoon.
So the only thing I would say, I guess, they didn't take a vote of the individuals who attended the meeting, but the board itself opposed it.
There were, I think, at least one supporter of ours who lived on Pine Street, but there were, you know, some individuals who signed the petition who were, you know, against, you know, just providing this type of parking.
And, you know, in their letter, the Society Health Civic Association referenced the fact that, you know, I guess referenced that there was some type of approval 19 years ago.
And, you know, there's a difference now.
I don't know what the difference is.
There was reference in the community meeting that, you know, that that block is different.
It's kept up better.
You know, we have one picture from Google Earth.
you know there's not many pictures of that block but one picture google it looks like the same
it's it doesn't look like it's changed in any way so um i don't know what the difference would be
so now and we also have levels of support from nearby neighbors right so we have 608 pine
streets 610 pine streets 604 pine street all in support of this project now i always try to be
forthright honest and and forthcoming you know if there's support and also if there's opposition
And there is opposition from some neighbors, and this was the, you know, this is included in Mr. Bonney's packet of people who signed a letter in opposition.
And this is where they live in, in, in, oops, sorry, with regards to that.
And, oops, sorry, with regards to that, some of those individuals don't touch Waverly Street, so I don't know how they're impacted.
Some of those in.
But worse, the people who are against the off-street parking have off-street parking, and I would say more dangerous off-street parking than we have.
So the individuals that signed at 406, 408, 410 South 6th Street, each of those individuals have off-street parking.
and what they have is parallel parking along the side of one home and they actually have to
drive on to a sidewalk in order to access that parking now i think there was some indication
you know during the meeting well this is not actually a sidewalk this is owned by one of the
you know unit owners of these three townhomes again if i was walking down the street i would
see that as a sidewalk i don't care if you know it's not partitioned off and you know again someone's
driving a car that to me is increasingly more dangerous than anything that we're proposing
uh there was a discussion during the meeting well you know waverly street is is a is a is a small
street where our kids play well these same individuals have parking along the side of
their street where while Waverly is partitioned off maybe to Society Hill where you wouldn't
typically expect cars although cars do come by and during the community meeting it was indicated
I believe that like maybe Amazon trucks or other service vehicles have gone down that street which
is much bigger than Volkswagen Golf this is prime territory where people are walking down the street
and they have off-street parking
and they're against our off-street parking.
So, you know, do as I say, not as I do.
So that's all I can say is that.
Same thing here.
This is Waverly Street, you can see.
And again, we have something that was reviewed
by the streets department.
We showed attorney radius.
But this person, these are the three townhomes here.
They're against it where you saw the off-street parking.
This town home too at 404 South 6th Street
is also against this project.
And again, you see they have a front-loading garage. Again, the thing is, it's like this board has, and the Planning Commission has an inclination not to support projects with front-loading garages. And one of the reasons is just because of the fact that you're taking a parking spot off of the street. And, you know, the other thing is, you know, taking your eyes off the street, which is not the case here.
um the next one is 604 Waverly which is the property across the street from us
our understanding is that 604 Waverly also has access in the rear to 601 Addison where they
have off-street parking non-accessory off-street parking which again according to the public
records there is no actual zoning permit for this non-accessory public private parking so again
And the individual who's against our project most strongly has off-street parking as well.
And then finally, 606 Waverly, which is not a picture here.
You know, one of the things was during our community meeting, we stated what we're offering is out of character, which is not.
And you've seen through these pictures, there's off-street parking, which I believe is more responsible than the off-street parking that currently exists.
and you'll see more off-street parking in the vicinity.
But also we're talking about taking away the character of Society Hill
by putting off-street parking on Waverly.
At 606 Waverly, and again, individuals who are against our project,
they're in a two-unit condominium for a single-family zoning classification.
They did not create that situation,
but the reason why that condominium exists
is because of the same process
that we are availing ourselves of today.
They got a variance at 606 Waverly.
606 Waverly was you're changing the character.
You're getting a variance.
That's not what our neighborhood's about.
Well, this is a single family neighborhood.
And the reason why their living arrangement exists
is because of this board.
So, and again, I think that,
and I can't be 100%,
I think we own the property
at the time that variance request was made we do not have any objection to that variance request
we're just asking as residents who've been here for over 20 years who intend to do some substantial
renovations to our house and at the same time seeking off-street parking in the rear responsibly
which this board has granted before we ask that the board consider all of these factors when
So after you listen to Mr. Bonney, and I'm sure there's other individuals, the people who are against this project have many of the same things we're asking for.
after you listen to Mr. Bonnie
and I'm sure there's other individuals
Our notice of decision. So this board granted under calendar number 03-1711, the off-street parking that we're requesting.
my clients purchased the property soon thereafter they never pursued the off-street parking at that
time they were not in the financial position to do the work that was needed to convert the rear
their rear yard and their fence to off-street parking probably the big mistake knowing you know
that they had to go through this whole process again they didn't think that they were doing
anything horrible by like revisiting a situation of most a generation later. They've lived here
for over 20 years. Their goal is to completely renovate their house. And they thought this is
a good opportunity to revisit this off-street parking situation. So again, I provided, this is
all of public record too. So anyone who purchased nearby would know that this property has been
approved for off street parking in the past so including the neighbors on waverly street but if
you look here's the notice of refusal doesn't really differ in in much respects to what you
saw today with today's refusal you know the society hill civic association provided a letter
of support i will give the caveat of this that the neighbor that was directly across the street from
us on Waverly Street was in support of this project with the condition that bollards would