We did a certified mailing, which is already a part of the record.
There's not really much else we could have done.
Yeah, I mean, from what I can see, you follow all the protocols that you needed to follow.
Mr. Goodman?
Yes, so we're certainly not contesting that mailers were not sent out, but the code also requires that district council office and overlapping RCOs be notified with advance notice of this meeting, which we weren't.
And if we were notified, we would have been able to have this conversation at that time, but we weren't.
So we're having it now, and I think, you know, the last date of the notification or the correspondence of the RCO being March 12th, I think is indicative, right?
These are some dates that are all that are going to stick out in our mind as the days right before the city shut down due to COVID.
and the Zoning Board's emergency regulations that they passed in the summer to start back up again
state that the 45-day clock restarted to account for this and allow for applicants to re-engage
with coordinating RCOs. And again, if we had known that this were a problem in July,
we could have faced it in July, but we didn't, and so we're here today.
We repeatedly emailed all the RCOs, all of them, throughout the COVID crisis. The only RCO to reply
was achievability and we proceeded i understand some groups have more difficulties than others
but the exact same 150 people would have been notified anyway so nothing and to and now after
the fact to say oh we're by the way we're not in november we were notified by the way we're not
meeting again in 2020 in november i think it's prejudice prejudice is my client yeah and that
certainly not here to besmirch anybody the fact i mean cobs creek neighbors association has had
quite a few zoning hearings since you know since the emergency regulations were passed so there
would have been again an opportunity to intercept this and follow this according to the code um but
it was missed and so we can't we asked the board not to proceed today
mr goodman do you happen to know when the uh cops creek folks would be meeting
um not off top of my head i mean usually they're standing meetings of the first monday of every
month um so that's that's what i know brings us into january right and this board doesn't come
back until i believe the 6th of january which is a month away at at the earliest um mr chairman
might i remind everybody that this is we never had the hearing yep i know this is part two we've
And we submitted written comment before that hearing as well.
And no one reached out to us to coordinate a meeting in the last four weeks.
The board's going to make a decision at the next week's executive session on the 16th.
Thank you.
Excuse me, but this is also a resumption hearing.
Is that correct, Mr. Anastasios?
Yes, this is part two.
So, Sharon, we're taking more testimony?
Yes, you are.
Oh, I'm sorry.
I'm sorry.
I got ahead of myself.
Well, the record's closed on our end.
Yeah, on your end.
Right.
And Mr. Goodman, do you have any other comments on your side?
No, nothing further.
Thank you for the opportunity to speak this morning.
Thank you.
All right.
Executive.
So, Sharon, okay, we're going to close.
The record's closed.
The Board will make a decision next Wednesday, the 16th at 9.30 a.m.
Okay, yes.
The Board will make a decision next Wednesday.
Thank you.
Thank you.
The other resumption hearing is MI2020-000774-3515 North 18th Street.
Mr. Knockinson.
can he be promoted he's being promoted now
good morning mr chair members of the board good morning mr knockins
identify yourself with the record please uh yes alan knockamson n-o-c-h-u-m-s-o-n
of Knockamson, PC, 123 South Broad Street, Suite 1600, Philadelphia, PA, 19109.
Just excuse me one second. I apologize.
sorry about that i'm trying to socially distance in my office i'm the only one here and i had to
answer the door sorry no problem do you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing
but the truth uh yes i do thank you please proceed uh yeah so i'm here to present 35 15 15
north 8 18th street and um i'm going to share my screen
uh so we were here previously regarding 35 enlarge that out yes
uh can you see him mr chair a little bit bigger
so let me uh just start out with the the notice of refusal so you can see
what this is about. So we're here I believe a month or so ago regarding 3515 North 18th Street.
We're here to legalize a four-unit dwelling in an RSA 5 property and the only reason why we're here
is for the used variants. During the presentation,
we showed that it's not uncommon to allow for multifamily structures within this proximity of
within this proximity of the property and the only thing holding up the board's decision
was community input we met with united uh toyoga and they unanimously are in support of this
project and we also have they asked us to get signatures from nearby neighbors uh directly
impacted by this project and here they are in support of it again it's we're not changing the
unit count we're just legalizing the account there are meters uh for the uh this these amount of
units and that's it thank you anyone have any questions on the board no no anyone would like
to testify in this case please raise your hand no times at no hands at this time oh one second
thank you planning commission one second chair um charles richardson has his hand up
Oh, sorry about that. Charles, Mr. Richardson, please identify yourself with the record and I'll swear you in.
Good morning, Mr. Chair and Board. Charles Richardson from the Office of Councilwoman Cindy Bass, room 312, City Hall.
You swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth.
I do. Councilwoman has no objections to granting the variance.
Thank you very much. Thank you. Anyone else to testify?
No hands, Chair.
Thank you.
Planning Commission?
Good morning, Chair and members of the Board.
My name is Greg Waldman, Planning Commission staff.
Do you swear for them to tell the truth?
The whole truth and nothing but the truth.
This property is indicated for single-family use in the comprehensive plan.
We feel that the addition of a fourth unit represents an overuse of the property.
Additionally, a decent development of multifamily in a single-family zone has created a collective overuse of the block.
in a single-family zone has created a collective overuse of the block.
Accordingly,
Accordingly, we object to the granting of the variance.
Thank you. MI 2020-000774 3515 North 18th Street. My vote is yes.
My vote is yes. My vote is yes. My vote is yes. My vote is yes. Thank you. Thank you.
uh tanya sharon we're ready to go forward with the irregular cases yes the regular list okay
carol number three i believe uh not garrett is not garrett street 1163 garrett yes number two
i'm sorry okay i moved my papers around yep it's okay thank you calendar number 1300 1163 garrett
street good morning mr chair good morning can you put your name and address on the record
please and spell your last name certainly it's jared klein k-l-e-i-n from blank rome 130 north
18th Street in Philadelphia. Do you swear or affirm to tell the whole truth and nothing but
the truth? Yes, I do. Do you also agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its
accuracy? I can waive the reading. Unfortunately, I can't stipulate to the accuracy, but I will
explain that as I get into my brief presentation. Okay. And have you mailed the exhibit packet with
proof of ownership, tax compliance, refusal referral, photos and plans of the property
five days in advance of this hearing and have you met with the rco and do you have a letter
yes to all those questions okay you may proceed thank you thank you very much i'm going to share
my screen can you all see that yes yes good okay so we're here for 1163 garrett street
which is in the pass young square neighborhood that i'm i'm sure the chair is very familiar
with the location um this property is dual zone so it's a cmx1 with rsa5 um and that zoning
designation we believe led to the missed refusal that i'm going to address in a second um but the
application is to um consolidate lot lines uh this parcel has an odd uh configuration in that
there's a rear there's an 1163 garret rear and an 1163 garret I'll call it the normal front parcel
we're adjusting those lot lines and seeking to construct a single family house because the lot
is of the typical South Philadelphia substandard lot size we got refusals for open area and rear
yard depth the refusal that we think should be there but is not is the setback for the third
floor from the street frontage. My read of section 14701-3 of the zoning code is that because we're
CMX-1 but attached to an RSA-5, we were required to comply with the dimensional requirements of
the RSA-5, but our plans did not show an eight-foot setback at the third floor. So we believe
Al and I missed that refusal. However, as I'll explain as we move forward a little bit, we did
address that issue with the RCO and the RCO was aware of that additional refusal and approved
our proposal with that understanding. As I mentioned, we did meet with Pass Young Square
Civic. Here is their letter of November 3rd where they were voted in non-opposition to the application
and you'll see that they noted in here that the attorney for the property owner stated the
application should have also received a refusal for the third story of the structure because it's
not set back from the front. So we were fully transparent with the RCO about the issue we
thought that L and I missed. Just to give you a sense of the application, this is the zoning map
showing you the location of the parcel and an aerial map showing you that this property is
located here. It is just off of Columbus Square and the city municipal building that's under a
redevelopment proposal is located here so it's in that area this is the photograph of the subject
property uh the idea is to demolish the existing structure as it is in as you can see a state of
disrepair uh photos of posting uh and this is to give you some context on the block
you can see that there are structures of a variety of sizes heights and shapes that are
variety of sizes, heights, and shapes that are already on this block. This house here that I'm
already on this block.
showing on the screen is across the street from the subject property with its oddly configured
bay windows in different heights. So we believe that what we're proposing is contextually appropriate
for this block and as I noted the RCO agreed with it. Here are the plans. It's going to be a standard
single-family house, much of the type that the board sees all the time. And again, the refusals
that we received were for the rear yard depth, the open area, and that third floor setback.
Floor plans and elevations. And the rest of my exhibit packet includes the standard documents
that I don't need to walk the board through, certificate of tax clearance, deed showing my
client's ownership, and the RCO mailing letter that was sent out to 107 different addresses.
I would ask, in order to address the missing refusal issue, I provided Sharon with a separate
set of the site plan. I would ask the board to stamp that as a proviso to clarify that the board
is approving of the plans as presented. Excuse me, Mr. Klein, this is Sharon Saleta. I
I did discuss this with Sarah Adamo at L&I and believe that it would be, just so it isn't confused, that these are not revised plans, these are your original plans.
So adding a proviso stating approval includes variance for third floor setback. Would that be acceptable to you?
If the board is inclined to grant this, yes, that would be a perfect proviso. Thank you.
Thank you.
And with that, I would just like my client to unmute herself, Elizabeth Garson, if you could virtually raise your hand.
She's available. She can unmute herself and wait to be sworn in.
Elizabeth, please state and spell your name and give us your address.
Sure, it's Elizabeth Garson, E-L-I-S-A-B-E-T-H, G-A-R-S-O-N, and I live at 1159 Garrett Street, Philadelphia, PA, 19147.
Mr. Chair or Madam Vice Chair, could you swear Ms. Garson in?
I think the Chair does. Okay, do you swear for him to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Thank you.
You may proceed.
Elizabeth, did you hear my presentation this morning?
I did.
And do you adopt my statements as true, correct
in your own testimony?
Thank you very much.
Members of the board, that's all I have.
Okay, I'm back.
Can you hear me?
Yes, we can.
Thank you, sorry about that.
Questions from the board?
Would anyone like else like to testify in this case? If so, please raise your hand.
No hands at this time, Chair. Thank you. Planning Commission.
Good afternoon. This is Greg Waldman, Planning Commission staff. This property
is indicated for commercial residential mixed use on the comprehensive plan.
both of the two lots consolidated are undersized from what is allowed under the zoning code,
the requested lot consolidation would bring the consolidated lot closer to the minimum
lot size required by the code. Accordingly, we have no objection to the granting of the
requested variance. Thank you. MI 2020-001300, 1163 Gerrit Street, my vote is yes.
my vote is yes excuse me this is sharon seleta could we add a proviso stating approval includes
variance for third story setback so noted thank you thank you my vote is yes my vote is yes with
proviso yes with proviso yes with proviso thank you very much everybody enjoy the rest of your
day thank you you as well calendar number 1302 1407-09 north 15th street
isaac slepner i think is the attorney
oh i have a michael matt marionne okay you can promote him
Mr. Sleipner is with Mr. Mattione's firm.
I'm on.
No, he's not promoted.
Sorry, he's coming in now as a panelist.