street at Oak Lane, there have been actually other numerous accidents, including a hit and run. My
niece's car was hit in front of the library. She only reported that to her insurance company,
not to the police. So that actually is one of the accidents that went unreported, but there are
numerous is it so a lot is it so tricky that the city put four speed bumps on your block
that is correct okay i don't have any other i don't have any other questions uh bill you can
mr carter cross-examine yeah sure could you go back to that aerial photo paul
all right um just a few questions on this uh miss young uh paul could you just hover over
Ms. Young's property? Right here. Which is right below the St. Mary's Protectorist Church? Well I
think that's an old thing from Google but that's where it is on this drawing. So Ms. Young when
you purchased the church had already burned down it was no longer there correct? Correct. Okay now
across 12th street on the corner we have the Oak Lane Library correct? Yes. Okay and that's not
single family residential correct correct and are you familiar with the premier apartments
yes and where are they in relation to your property right here okay are you familiar with
the premier apartments yes okay are you aware that there's 46 apartment units in there
yeah i am yes and that there's no part there's no on-site parking with that property correct
and that there's no part there's no on-site parking with that property correct
yes that's part of the problem okay and then there's also the firehouse that's on
oakland behind the library correct yes okay then across uh north of oakland then you have
the elwood school correct the car with respect i think it was noted in uh miss williams's testimony
that we stipulate that there are some municipal buildings
within the general vicinity.
Okay, just one thought, just one last question.
You're not a traffic engineer or any kind of a civil engineer, correct, Ms. Young?
Yes, I am.
I have my master's degree in civil engineering, yes.
Okay, so you are a civil engineer, okay.
Yes, I am.
Okay, did you do any engineering studies that you've presented to the board here today
for this project?
I did do some measuring of the street yes I did you've not presented that to the board
no I did not okay that's all I have my next witness is uh penny null if she could be recognized
I'm chair um if I could mention that we have over 100 people in this zoning I'm hearing and
that we have another special, and the allotted time has surpassed, and just to note.
I thank you, and I just said that a few minutes ago, so.
Well, Mr. Chair, I'd like to ask you what you'd like to do.
Well, if there's any substantive issues that have not yet been covered,
not, again, not to be disrespectful to the folks who are waiting online to testify,
I don't imagine we're going to get anything much different than has already been testified to by
the near neighbors uh well there there is Mr. Chairman there I could put on Ms. Kroll and ask
her like you know 45 seconds of stuff and then I can rest and then I can do 45 seconds and rest
and then I can do my closing argument now he can ask cross but you know I just want her to talk
about her property okay proceed we can finish it today then that's what we'll do if we can't
finish it today then then you're right okay but well i don't want us to close and we'd like you
know hopefully that we'd like the record to be closed so thank you ms crawl can you uh
unmute yourself she's available she just has to unmute herself i'm sorry
miss kroll penny can you unmute yourself can anyone hear me i can hear you i can yes chair
we hear you fine all right because i leave i lose i lose and have to keep getting out so i get lost
occasionally miss kroll miss kroll good afternoon please identify yourself for the record spell
your first and last name and provide us with your and provide us with your address my name is penny
Kroll, P-E-N-N-Y-K-R-O-L-L. I live at 6610 Lawton Avenue. Do you swear or affirm to tell the
truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? I do. Ms. Proceed, Mr. Bonnie. Ms. Kroll, I'd like
you to jump to the last part of your testimony, which is about your house. Yes. I'm going to put
your house on here, so go for it. I live at 6610 Lawton. It's over half an acre in size, actually
0.66 acres in size. It's about one and a half blocks away from the subject property. I have a
huge, large front yard and backyard that the kids can play. The white fence you see there
is just the front side of the house versus the back side of the house. Well, we bought the house
because we were looking for a nice neighborhood to raise the children in and a nice large space
Ms. Kroll, so you're, now I'm showing the data sheet from your property and it's correct that
you said your parcel is 0.66 acres and you have a single family home on it. Is that correct?
Yes, I do. I'm showing now the zoning map that shows your house in relation to the subject
property, your house being on a property that's 0.66 acres and the subject property being 0.48
acres according to the engineer of the applicant, is that correct? Yes. I have no further questions
of this witness. All right, just a couple quick questions. Ms. Law, did you receive a letter from
my office with regard to the RCO meeting on this project? Yes. Okay, because I don't see you on the
list. Oh, that's because there are three of us who live in the house, we're a multi-generational home,
and my daughter and son-in-law, the Light Hearts, were the ones who went.
Yeah, I don't see 6610 Lawton as an address that we were required to notice by the...
yeah i don't see 6610 lawton as a as an address that we were required to notice by the uh
well oh oh let me tell you we did not get a notice from miss crawl miss crawl miss crawl
thank you for your testimony thank you and i would just state an objection that she's not
uh a near neighbor so we would ask that her testimony be stricken look at it 20 look at
exhibit 23 mr kurt so i i'll rest and i'm i'm ready for closing arguments i think the applicant
should go first since it's their burden but then I'm ready to chime in. Mr. Kroll, Mr. Kerr I'm sorry
are you ready? I'd like to actually just share my screen just in rebuttal to some of this testimony
Mr. Pony if you can get out now I'm going to find I just have one visual I'd like to share.
I think I'm finished I think I'm out tell me if I need to do something.
NEW SPEAKERS. I'M TRYING TO SHARE. IS ANYONE SEEING?
NEW SPEAKERS, NOT YET.
NEW SPEAKERS, ARE WE SEEING THAT NOW?
NEW SPEAKERS, YES, WE ARE.
Okay, this is exhibit six from my – and this is actually an aerial photo and two other photos of the prior church building that was located on this property on 1122 until 2013.
It's a very substantial church building, not single-family residential, very limited parking and or driveway.
way and this is what the neighborhood was used to from the 20s to 2013 that's what the record
indicates so I'll state that in rebuttal to Mr. Boney's case and as far as the closing we believe
that the record here support well actually are there any are there any other neighbors that are
going to make statements here I would hope not no I think we close that down for them we close that
Okay. So I believe that the record supports the grant of the requested variance. First of all,
this photo establishes that this property is really nonconforming since the 1920s. But for
the prior, this church would still be there. We're proposing a much less intensive use,
40 units of senior housings, which is one of the most innocuous and unobtrusive uses that you can
imagine. We have testimony in the record of the significant efforts made by both Pastor Richardson
and Mr. Bruce Morgan, the developer, to be respectful of the neighborhood and also to
respond to their concerns. We've been at this for a year and a half now. There are a significant
number of support letters which have also been submitted in the record in our binder number two.
So the board should have that and you can refer to those support letters. So there is significant
excuse me, significant support from the neighborhood.
We also have testimony from our expert architect
that the use in the proposal is reasonable
for the property, that there'll be no negative impacts
and that the requested variances are the minimum
that are needed for this reasonable use.
There's testimony from Mr. David Horner, the traffic expert,
that the proposal will not create traffic impacts
and that there's more than sufficient parking
for the proposed use.
We have supportive testimony from Sarah Rodriguez,
our civil engineer.
all of that all all three of those are experts and there is no expert rebuttal testimony to any
of that evidence final couple points the planning commission letter which was read into the record
at the last hearing recognizes the need for affordable housing and indicates unequivocal
support for the grant of these variances and finally at the first hearing back in february
council and parker's office made a very significant statement in support of the project so we think
We've done our homework.
We've done everything we could.
We've tried to accommodate the neighborhood.
We recognize that there's still some opposition,
but we believe that given the history of this property,
it's a reasonable proposal
and that the requested variances are warranted.
Thank you.
Mr. Chairman, I'll be as quick as I can.
Go ahead, I'm sorry.
Go ahead, Mr. Boni.
The applicant has not provided any evidence
demonstrating a hardship for the use variants
or for any of the dimensional variances. The subject property is zoned RSD3, which is for
single-family residential detached only. It's a rectangular property with one corner that's
extended a little bit. It's 0.48 acres. It's flat. It's vacant. And we, in fact, have demonstrated
what we don't have to demonstrate, that the compliance with the zoning code can
What we don't have to demonstrate, that the compliance with the zoning code can in fact be done.
That a single-family house can easily be put here as it does exist on three sides of this property.
On the south side, there's Yvette Young's house and the rest of the block.
Behind it, there's a house on 11th Street behind this property that's a single-family house.
That's next to that rear driveway.
And across the street on Oak Lane, there is three single family homes. So it is really beyond any dispute that a single family home can be built on this property easily. In fact, Ms. Kroll's property, which is a block and a half away, is on a property that's larger than this property. So certainly a single family home can be on this property.
We have demonstrated parking problems that the applicant has not mentioned.
We have demonstrated safety problems that the applicant has not mentioned.
And I'm really just hitting the high points here.
But also, Mr. Chairman, take a look at the parking situation.
The church in the 90s obtained a variance to have seven spots, even though 74 was required.
Seven spots.
Now they come to you with a unity of use application to share those spots. There is absolutely zero evidence presented to warrant a reduction in the variance that you granted them.
Similarly, this subject parcel needs 27 spots.
So with the church now under the current code requiring, I believe, 35 spots, I'm sorry, 32 spots.
So the church under the current code, as indicated by the refusal, requires 32 spots.
The subject project would require 27 spots.
that's total required 59 spots, and they're providing you with 12. That is, that's not even
a variance, so not, I don't think a variance can be granted for such a radical departure from the
code. Finally, I will just add, as I'll be a bit of a lawyer and mention that this board granted
a variance for the subject parcel four years ago for a parking lot. It's undisputed,
Can you still hear me? It's undisputed that it's been used as a parking lot.
And so, of course, there's no hardship if you deny this application, because they can use it
with the variance that you granted them, or your predecessor, granted them four years ago.
So in conclusion, Mr. Chairman, we ask you to do the right thing. We think this neighborhood
has worked hard to show you the strength of their resolve. They've sold yard signs. They've had
three rallies. They've had standing room only meetings. They've consistently been overwhelmingly
voting against this project. We think and we humbly request with all the respect and strength
that they can muster. And I think that they have earned and that we ask you to vote no on this
project it does not give us any pleasure to ask that um we're we're it's a shame that we think the
applicant has um you know misunderstood the requirements of a hardship um in in philadelphia
and um you know we're happy to see senior housing someplace else at a different product property
there are there are areas of this region of this district of the city where the city said in its
2035 plan that we should have more senior housing there's plenty of areas in the upper north district
that are properly zoned for that and we would be happy to you know to to see the developer go to
one of those places properly zoned but this is unfortunately the wrong location and we thank
you so much for your time um and we really you know put our fate in your if i could respond just
briefly, Mr. Chairman? I can't hear you're muted, Mr. Chairman. 30 seconds, please. Okay, just very
quickly. Mr. Bonnie's testimony was all neighbors who opposed the property project. There was no
expert testimony from anyone who testified that it was in fact possible to build single family
homes on this property. And the other thing to just keep in mind is for 70 some years, this was
a church. And the neighborhood had the good fortune that the church burned down. And now
they want the property to be down-zoned, down-used to single-family homes. This property has
this property has been used institutionally since the 1920s. What we're proposing is a
been used institutionally for since 19—1920.
significant reduction in intensity and we believe that the expert testimony is unrebutted and
warrants the grant of the variances. Thank you. Thank you. I said earlier, a few minutes ago,
that I was shutting down the testimony. I failed to ask, is there anyone from
the councilwoman's office available? Is Hillary still here? Is Hillary on?
hillary you can unmute hillary i apologize i i got i got ahead of myself on that one
oh that's okay please identify yourself you're still on the earth from earlier today
yes this is hillary emerson on behalf of councilwoman sherelle parker
please proceed um well i had i spoke at the last two hearings uh mr chair so i i did not have any
additional comments to add from the councilwoman okay thank you i just wanted to make sure that
thank you very much no problem uh questions from the board no uh i think we got the planning
commission last time but i'll ask the planning commission again good evening or good afternoon
Ariel DiLiberto from the City Planning Commission. Our previous testimony stands. We are in support
of this project in variance. Thank you. I'd like a little more time to talk to our board.
So the record on this case is closed. We'll render a decision next Wednesday, December the 16th
at 9 30 a.m. Thank you all for your participation. Okay, thanks for your patience and your attention.
Thank you, everybody.
and we're doing 20th street now yes calendar number one four three three four one four sorry
um chair you um can i please just respectfully ask um that if it's okay with you all we can
just do the continuances for 330 so that everyone here doesn't have to wait in case it's continued
absolutely just give me a second to get my paperwork okay all right on the 3 30 list
the following cases have requested a continuance uh page number one 20 mi 2020-001830
2041 north reese r-e-e-se street
Number six on our list, MI 2020-001-861-2442 North 54th Street.
And what I have next, Sharon, from earlier today, you had mentioned that page number seven,