It's 43 of the pages are letters from immediate neighbors.
And 43 of the pages are letters from immediate neighbors in opposition to the use.
And I'm just going to go through them very quickly, if you might, if you allow me.
Oscar Beiser, can you see these, Mr. Chair, or no?
We're seeing blank pages, Vernon.
As am I.
Okay, hold on for one second.
Let's try again.
We have photos of the property
in relation to uh mr beisert's property okay a list of reasons of opposition from mr beisert and
then uh 10 pages of letters of opposition okay uh this is the the property back here is the
property in question it literally backs up onto my client's property uh he is the most impacted
adjacent neighbor this is his home and here's the property in question which by the way is zoned
for residential single-family use.
Here it is again.
Here's my client's property,
and here's the subject property in question.
It is literally right next door and abuts.
I'm going to pass over the reasons for the opposition
because I'll talk about that,
But I do want to talk about, show you that various letters in objection from 5114.
That's our property.
I'm sorry.
As you can see here, 5121, 5111, 5117.
do you want to
5121 sorry yep there you go
so you have 10 paid 5123 10 pages of immediate neighbors and let me tell you what's going on
5114. For several years, Mr. Chair, this block has been single family, mostly some multifamily.
In the last several years, these multifamily properties on the block have actually done
something that doesn't happen a whole lot in Philadelphia. They've returned to single family
use. So there is a concerted effort in the immediate neighborhood to turn these properties
back into single-family homes. They're large, and they take some upkeep. But that was a concerted
effort from the neighbors to turn these properties back from multifamily into single-family.
Now, yes, my property, my client bought his property and moved in right adjacent to this property where it was a daycare center.
But to have it as a medical facility sort of brings this into a new category that my client is just not prepared to accept.
And neither is most of the folks on the block.
I want to just get to the legal issues.
There is no physical attribute to this property, none whatsoever, either unique to its physicality
or unique to its place, where it could not be used for its proposed and preferred use
by the city code. None. And even if it were, what the applicant is proposing is simply not
the least restrictive variance that one would seek one would seek if it were the least restrictive
multi-family dwelling which may in fact be something that my client and his neighbors
could in fact live with but what they're asking for is beyond the least restrictive
it's beyond something that any unique physical condition would require
And, as you've heard testimony, that there is, in fact, a commercial corridor just feet away, where, in fact, this use, the proposed use, which my client and the opponents certainly believe is necessary for the city of Philadelphia.
and as you've heard testimony that there is in fact a commercial
That use is necessary, it's needed, and there is a demand for that use, but it's just not here.
That use should be somewhere within 500 feet.
There are several properties that are zoned so that this particular use could be used as a matter of right.
And the seller of this property, the person who owns this property, is not under any particular hardship because they put it up for sale.
the applicant is not under any particular hardship because they didn't purchase the property so
they've purchased they've they're under contract for this property and you know if this were sold
already we may be having a different conversation if if these this applicant had bought the property
thinking they could use it for their proposed use then i'm in it may you know may not even be here
but the fact of the matter is they have not done so. So any particular hardship that may occur
would have been completely self-imposing in this particular instance. There is no unique
physical condition that would make this variance something that we could support,
especially the immediate neighbor. This proposed use is not, by any stretch of the imagination,
the least restrictive variance that the adjacent neighbor or my client could support.
And furthermore, the neighborhood itself has several zoned pieces of real estate
that could readily accept the use that this operator would like to operate in.
So for all of those reasons, I do believe, you know, and again, I've scratched my head
looking for some sort of way out of that.
There's no hardship here.
There's no reason to grant this variance.
I'm going to ask my client to come on and to talk about how it will immediately impact
him with respect to congestion.
By the way, although it will be by appointment only, and I have every reason to believe that
those who have testified have testified truthfully, but there will be 15 staff members, which is
three times as much as the number of staff that currently exist for the daycare. Going from a
daycare facility to a medical facility is a big jump. And again, there's no argument that this
use in the city at large is something that is necessary and needed. But in a residential
neighborhood, on a residential block, where multifamilies are actually being converted to
single families, we do believe this is just a bit too far. And with that, I'd like to call
Oscar Beiser to the stand. And Vern, how long will Oscar be on?
two minutes
hi could you please hi sir could you please shake your name and spell for the court stenographer
Oscar Beisert O-S-C-A-R last name Beisert B-E-I-S-E-R-T right do you swear or affirm to tell
the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth I do please proceed sir thank you Mr. Chair
wanted to thank you and i'm just trying to give mr bizer i'm going to ask you three questions
first okay sure did you hear my presentation to the board i did did you uh uh believe it to be
true and accurate to the best of your knowledge i do you accept it as your own testimony
i do i do okay and do you have anything to add yes go ahead so um i just wanted to uh go over
a few points as to why I'm opposed to this variance. I'm not against this program. I think
it's an amazing program. Ms. McNeil sounds like an amazing person and leader. This is about how
this property is zoned. Germantown was built by a lot of different giants and different entities
and almost all of them are gone now. Nothing lasts forever. What does last for her unfortunately is
zoning unless, you know, there's a major change of use at the site. My house is
Unless, you know, there's a major change of use at the site. My house is, is sort of surrounded by this property on at least two sides. The block is, despite what has been said previously, the block is almost entirely residential, except at the corners.
I wanted to add that while my house is single family, this house is also, I mean, this property also is adjacent, meaning lots, the lots that touch it on Newhall Street and Wayne consist of 10 single family houses and one triplex.
That is not exactly a dense, you know, a typical Philadelphia, you know, apartment, street of apartments.
I wanted to add that despite the applicant's tended use, there is no guarantee that the funds will be raised to renovate the property or that the applicant will remain at the property in perpetuity.
As I said, the zoning will, though, and that's that's a big problem for for me and many of my neighbors.
As you know, this would allow for all different manner of uses, medical uses that would be inappropriate for a residential block
and certainly inappropriate for a building that's not located immediately upon the street and is behind and close to other people's rear yards.
As a daycare, the property was generally open five days a week, usually during traditional hours.
There were intense periods of drop-off at each end of the day.
The same parents and children, for the most part, come every day.
You know exactly who they are as a resident.
It's a very pleasant neighbor.
The most annoying thing is the sounds of kids playing.
It's a fairly pleasant use.
The proposed change would lead to, as my attorney said, 15 employees potentially,
and that means and as well as dozens of people coming which means to means possibly 15 parking
spaces and um dozens of people parking on the block throughout the day and even after you know
by the time people they close people have already been home from work by seven o'clock and they
won't be able to park um additionally um my house shares a sidewalk with the subject building that
was created by an easement years ago the proposed use will increase the number of adult people using
the sidewalk throughout the day. It will increase my liability, my risk as a property owner.
Additionally, my primary entry and porch faces onto the shared sidewalk. So that will increase,
you know, that will lead to further diminishment of my privacy all throughout the day, which is
not the case with the daycare. The applicant is also proposing to use a portion of the interior
as community space for meetings with something like 30 laptops for community use. I do fear
that that could turn into a lot of traffic um you know additional traffic in the residential
in a residential block um the proposed change also uh has the potential and i and i'm not this
is nothing against the program but it does have a potential given what could be used if this
occupant leaves um to devalue my home as a single family residence um as well as other single family
and small multifamily buildings on the block.
There were like a couple vacant, as my attorney said,
several vacant houses and flat houses
have been returned to single-family use,
which is pretty unusual.
Germantown Avenue is just a few blocks away
with innumerable vacant storefronts and buildings.
There are 18th century houses
that have a residential feeling that need to be redone.
There are all manner of building types
along germantown avenue like an old town um and many of them need probation and could serve
you know could could be could be purchased and not have a commercial feeling but have a
residential feeling but still be on the commercial corridor um you know i and i did want to just add
that we have um we have panhandlers on wayne avenue too they're friendly so just don't worry
about that i mean there are panhandlers on germantown avenue and on wayne avenue um the
properties, you know, as my attorney said, there are letters to opposition from 36 near neighbors
and numerous other neighbors that are just outside the boundary. It is my belief that
the subject building can remain a daycare or be converted to residential use. I would certainly
support a few apartments in the building if that were an option. And I just believe that
given the potential uses that could come under medical, given that no business, no entity is
permanent, it would be wrong for the middle of a residential block. Thank you. Thank you, Mr.
Biser. Mr. Chair, because there's no evidence of apparent hardship, a physical hardship, because
Because there's no evidence of apparent hardship, a physical hardship, because there's absolutely
no evidence that this proposal is the least restrictive variance requested, and because
there's ample evidence of opposition from all of the immediate neighbors, and especially
the most impacted, I respectfully request that this variance at appeal be denied.
I'm going to yield to the council member's office because I believe they have something to say.
Thank you. Hold on a minute. Eileen, do you have any questions of that witness?
No, I just have some follow up. I mean, it's zoned RM1. Whether or not people use it as a
single family, it can still be used as multifamily. There's no denying that Wayne Avenue is a mixture
of residential and residential can be single family, multifamily, twin. There's all a matter
of residential. You're dropping this use in a residential neighborhood is a little disingenuous
because there are multifamily properties that can be across the street. Even if you're converting,
somebody can convert it back. To say that they would be on board for a multifamily use here,
we do not know that. You'd still have to go for a variance. So it doesn't seem that
that's any less restrictive. You still have to go through the same process,
multifamily is multifamily. You'd have other people that you do know or don't know. You have
cars. You have the same issues. All right. So listen to me. Mr. Chair, if they want to put a
multifamily development in there, then- I know. But you can say that, but nobody can say it.
Listen to me. Eileen, listen to me. Everybody knows that. Both you stop. Both. So here's where
we're going to go. This has went for a lot longer. We still have four or five cases from the two
o'clock list. I'm going to have a resumptive hearing for this. When we come back, we'll go
to the board, we'll go to the audience, and then we'll go to Planning Commission, okay? But we're
going to have a resumptive hearing because we have to go on with the day. Let Ms. Quigley speak,
please you're muted eileen i'm sorry i'm sorry chair i just wanted to for the record let everybody
know that we did not we were not aware of mr anastasio's engagement until this morning
we have not looked at any letters i i'm just letting the board know so you're going to have
your chance to say that there's going to this is going to go to a resumptive hearing we we just got
to move okay oh that's fine i understand and thank you to both you and thank you for your
witnesses. Okay. Thank you for your time. All right. Thank you.
Number 10, MI 2024-003-578-1401 North Delaware Avenue. Stephanie Boggs of Magna is the attorney.
Excuse me, Mr. Chair, can we please jump to 11 and 12 next due to a scheduling issue? Thank you.
Number 11, MI 2024-003-723, 2736 Germantown Avenue.
Al Nockamson is the attorney.
There is no RCO letter at this point.
The meeting was held July 18th.
Maybe Mr. Nockamson may have it.
There was also a petition signed by 29 neighbors in favor of this.
uh mr chair a letter did excuse me a letter did um come through um i think it was right before
hearings this afternoon um and i believe mr knockamson will go over it if not i can read
it into the record i believe there are some concerns expressed by the rco okay mr knockamson
sorry i wasn't actually i i wasn't paying attention to you know me being called so i
apologize for the delay sure sure um just state your name for the record alan knockamson could
you identify your client and relationship to the property so which matter is this this is the third
street or this is 2736 germantown okay yes my client is there's a doctor in the house ministries
the owner of the property and then the virtual audience is uh theresa lonti and our vice chair
has a few questions good afternoon counsel do you agree to wave the reason of the refusal
or stipulate towards accuracy i do have you emailed them all the required documents and
exhibits that is needed to proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing uh yes we have
thank you council please proceed and share your screen thank you
hi so i am presenting 27
Hi. So I am presenting 2736 Germantown Avenue. What we're proposing to do is essentially rebuild
the church that, unfortunately, that church building had to be demolished a few years ago
because of structural issues with it. So currently it's a vacant lot. And you'll see from, you know,
the presentation materials, the variances that we're seeking are identical to what the previous
building, what was previously there. So we're seeking two variances, which you'll see in the
presentation materials, but in terms of occupied area and rear yard depth, you know, what we're
seeking is, you know, what was a building structure that was there before. The use is allowed as of
right. This is a CMX2 property. So during our presentation, we'll review first a notice of
refusal. Then I would say this afternoon sometime we finally received the correspondence from the
12th and Cambria Advisory Board. I will say this. We had a meeting. We had a vote. The majority of
the people in the virtual audience, I don't remember if it was an in-person meeting or