changing use from industrial to residential introduces additional households into this
legacy industrial area, which has heightened exposure levels of air and soil pollution.
And second, industrial, sorry, new residential uses degrade the viability of existing industrial
uses as described by the representative from the Commerce Department.
The proposed use, therefore, directly conflicts with the recommendations of the comprehensive
We further believe that the appellant has not shown evidence of unique physical circumstances
that prevent the range of uses permitted in ICMX.
Lots of this size are routinely developed with light industrial and retail uses throughout the city.
We disagree that the site is totally unusable for these uses.
The City Planning Commission recommends that the board deny the use variants.
Thank you.
So, Mr. Savard and Ms. Pritzker, I'm going to have an executive session relative to what we heard today.
We'll do that next Wednesday morning.
Do we have a date for next Wednesday?
what's next Wednesday's date um January um 25th yeah yeah and we'll vote on that next Wednesday
at 9 30 yes next Wednesday morning at 9 30 okay and thank you everybody for your your input
thank you okay so we want to do do we have our person Hillary John yes Mr. Chair um John Monluck
has joined us as an alternate board member.
So what we're going to do is we're going to do the housing authority
cases, okay? Exactly.
Exactly. And then we can move on
to Parkside. Yes. Okay. All right.
thank you.
Ismail Shahid is going
to recuse himself from these two cases.
Number three.
Mr. Chair.
Yep. You're going to need someone else to
read it.
Yep. Yep.
We'll do it.
MI 2021-005-318-649-North 11th Street.
Zen Jin is the attorney and also, where's the other case here, number 7, MI 2021-00519-610
North 11th Street. Zen Jin is the attorney. Letter of support from 14th Ward, Democratic
Executive Committee with proviso. Good morning. Good morning. Could you state your name,
please and spell for the court reporter yes my name is zhenjin z-h-e-n j-i-n 1617 john f kennedy
boulevard suite 1838 total of your pa 19103 uh here on behalf of the applicant right do you
swear or firm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth i do um do you stipulate
to the refusals right and um have all your paperwork has been in an appropriate time
within five days? Yes. Okay. Could you identify your client and the relationship to the property?
Yes. My client is Philadelphia Chinatown Development Corporation. There is a preliminary
matter with regard to site control I want to address to the board. I believe, so this property
is a Philadelphia Housing Authority property that was licensed to Philadelphia Chinatown
Development Corporation. That licensing agreement unfortunately expired on December 31st of last
year. However, we do have a representative from the Philadelphia Housing Authority here today
to verify that my client, PCDC, is still authorized to move forward with the application.
We also have pending signed agreements of sale that will be coming soon, which we can then
forward to the board so the board may make a decision. This is per my conversation with
This is per my conversation with Ms. Emerson in the last day or two regarding the situation.
Ms. Emerson in the last day or two.
Hilary, are we okay with this?
Hilary?
Yes, Mr. Chair.
Why don't we bring on the PHA representative and we can take care of that.
And then Mr. Jin can do the remainder of his testimony and we'll hold for the receipt of the agreements of sale.
Thank you.
I believe Mr. Xconde should be available to answer on behalf of PHA.
Mr. Xconde, oh, there he is.
Good morning.
Good morning.
Can you state your name, please, and spell for the court reporter?
Yeah, it's Cyril Xconde, first name C-E-R-I-L-L-E, last name is Cyril Xconde.
Right.
Right. Do you swear for him to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
I do. Proceed, counsel.
Thank you. Mr. Skande, can you verify to the zoning board that Philadelphia Chinatown Development Corporation is, in fact, authorized on behalf of the Philadelphia Housing Authority to move forward with this zoning application?
I can.
Thank you. And there is a pending agreement of sale that should be executed shortly, giving the rights directly of the sites to my client, and that would be forthcoming shortly, correct?
Yes, that is correct. If not this morning, then sometime tomorrow, to be just enough to get the signature finalized.
Thank you. Mr. Chairman, is that sufficient for the board?
That's fine. Why don't you start your case?
Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Xikande, for coming today.
Thank you.
I'm going to go ahead and share with the board the application for 610 North 11 first and then
followed by 649. We have submitted to the board previous documentation relating to 611 and 649
North 11. I have up before the board right now the refusal. Can everyone see that? Yes. Thank you.
So this is an application for essentially single family style housing in a RM1 district through the use of subdivision.
To give a little background to the idea behind this, my client, Philadelphia Chinatown Development Corporation, was given access to the land from Philadelphia Housing Authority with the condition that they build affordable housing.
And in order to give the best result for the affordable housing side, my client looked at the property, which is a single larger property for RM1 zoning, which incidentally would allow four units normally by right, and decided that in order to meet the affordable housing goals and in order to be able to sell the properties to those owners in the future,
the best possible way is to simply subdivide and redesign these as smaller single family units.
We met extensively with the community to discuss this particular project. There is a
benefits agreement and a marketing plan, all of which are also submitted as part of this application
exhibits, and we would ask that to be incorporated. Those negotiations essentially is to ensure that
people in the neighborhood would have the best ability to access, and that it would be a fair
and equal access to all when these projects are completed. The neighborhood does prefer to have
a single-family residential and has no objection to the change, considering that ultimately from
a density standpoint, we essentially have the same number of uses on this lot. A rendering
is provided, and this is essentially how the property may look once completed. As you can see,
we're going to try to keep the brick facade. That is something the community will prefer,
especially in red brick. And the way the properties will be divided, the access to each unit,
three would be on the street here, and one would be facing 11th Street. Each of these would
essentially be a single family house. The property's main variance is in fact a lot size.
We do want to point out that despite the fact that we have reduced the individual lots to
build the single units, we are leaving still rear yard space for these units, as well as there is
an access alleyway on the side. But again, these will be essentially smaller single family houses
that allows a lower value for income requirements
and therefore meet the affordable housing requirements.
So with regard to lots in the area,
So with regard to lots in the area, while not more than 80% or 60% of the lots may be that small, there are smaller lots in the area.
well, not...
So these lots and this design is not out of character with the neighborhood altogether.
together the need for the affordable housing and the goals of the development itself is in
conformance with the goals of the community. And therefore, we did receive support from the
community for this application. So again, the primary variance is for lot size. And in order
to meet the goals of providing the affordable housing, we do need to ask the board's favorable
consideration of the lot size variances and the use as single family, although ultimately it is
still four units in total on this site. This is the floor plan before the board. There are no
basement on the design. So this is first floor, second floor, and there is a third floor. There
is no basement and these will be individually accessed. That's its own small single family
unit. I'm happy to answer any questions, and my client is available to verify my testimony.
You want to present the second part? Is there a second?
Yes, I will go ahead and do that one as well.
When do you present that at the same time, right?
Sure. Thank you. So I am now going to share with the board the other application, which is the
649 North 11th Street.
Oh, I'm sorry, this did not come up properly.
Here we go.
All right.
So this is the second application, which is 649 North 11th Street.
This application differs slightly from the first one in that this particular lot is zoned RSA 5.
However, I'm going to move to the refusal simply for the subdivision of the lot, same as before, it is a lot size issue.
I'm going to move to the site plan and photos, which will make it easier for the board to see why we're asking for this particular variance.
So this is a large lot that runs from street to street.
In order to meet the goal of providing both affordable housing and yet maintaining a single-family style, we are proposing to have essentially a single-family house on each end of the lot facing each of the street, which will provide the ability for the development of two smaller single-family houses meeting the goal of affordability.
and still they're substantially sized at 1080 square feet,
the lot will simply be divided down the middle.
I want to point out this is not the only lot in that area
that has been divided in the past in this format.
So the smaller lot is not, again,
is not out of character with the neighborhood as far as the lots
and the use will continue to be a single family use.
Again, with the coordination with the RCO
and discussion of the proper ways to present this to the community,
we once again receive support on this particular request
as far as our variance requests from the RCO.
And this one is a variance from RSA 5s to two subdivided RSA 5 lots,
which will also be developed individually as single-family houses.
The floor plan, once again, is a three-story structure,
much like the other one without a basement uh each will have their own rear yard and each will
be used as a single family house again my client is here to verify my testimony why don't we bring
your client on sure um can we have uh miss uh caroline uh a-u-n-g be identified
Ms. Caroline, you've been allowed to talk.
Hi, could you state your name, please, and spell for the court reporter?
My name is Caroline Ong. I'm from the Philadelphia Chinatown Development Corporation.
Hi, could you spell your name, please, for the court reporter?
Sure. It's spelled C-A-R-O-L-I-N-E. Last name is A-U-N-G.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Proceed, counsel.
Thank you. Ms. Ong, did you see my presentation and hear my testimony before the Zoning Board?
Yes. Can you verify my testimony is true and correct and adopted as your own?
Yes. Thank you. Okay. Questions from the Board?
None. No, Mr. Chairman. All right. No, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you. Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
questions or comments from the virtual audience
i see no hands here high planning commission thank you chair bergman ian hegarty for the
philadelphia city planning commission with regard to 649 north 11th street in 2017 the zoning map
was amended from rm1 to rsa5 in accord with recommendations from the comprehensive plan
this is a large through lot the proposed configuration is consistent with several
adjacent properties and with the physical features of the lot the city planning commission recommends
that the board grant the variance with regard to 610 north 11 street in 2017 the zoning map was
amended in this area and the property was intentionally left as rm1 multifamily although
separate lots are proposed the redevelopment substantially conforms to the form requirements
of rm1 and so the city planning commission recommends that the board grant the variances
Thank you. We're going to continue this until we have the agreement of sales. The case is closed except for the submission of the agreement of sales. Am I right, Hillary?
Yes, that is correct, Mr. Chair.
okay thank you all right thank thank you all right number one mi 2021 004-548-4306-08
parkside avenue darwin beauvais is the attorney for um
the applicant and steve masters is the attorney for the protestants
mr chair this is hillary i just want to note for the record um on this case it will be um yourself
um ishmael shahid um i believe it's back in the room um and uh john monlock yes uh mr snell will
need to uh be leaving shortly thank you yes i'm back mr chair all right thanks ish okay
Could you state your name, please, and spell for the court reporter?
Yes. Good morning, Mr. Chairman, members of the board. My name is Darwin Beauvais. That's Darwin, D-A-R-W-I-N. Beauvais is B as in boy, E-A-U-V as in victory, A-I-S as in Sam.
I'm counsel for the applicant, and I am located at Dilworth Paxson, 1500 Market Street, Philadelphia, PA.
Do you swear a firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Right, dear.
Right.
Mr. Masters?
Yes, I believe I was already sworn in.
You were already sworn.
Just state your name for the record, please.
Steve Masters, M-A-S-T-E-R-S, with the law firm of JustLaws.
I represent two RCOs who are in opposition to this application.
And if I remember, this is a redemptive hearing.
That's correct.
Beauvais, we were partly through your presentation, if I remember correctly, right?
That's correct.
So why don't we pick up from there?
Yes, and just to reorient the board, again, about this application, this application was originally designed in 2020.
The proposal included 15 residential units with commercial space and was issued initial refusals for rear yard, open space, density, and height.
The ZBA heard arguments in May 2021 and June 2021.
The community was very, very much up in arms about the project, and we pulled back and we did a complete redesign in October of 2021.
With that, we actually, L&I gave us the ability to amend our refusal, and the project was ultimately reduced to 12 units with a commercial space.
Refusals only for the deck and the setback and rear yard, still height.
But then we pulled the project back again, and we reduced the height.