be a hardship for the Grouse to deconvert this building back to a less dense use involving
moving of kitchens, conversion of access, etc., etc., especially when it's been in this three-unit
configuration um for about 50 uh 60 years um if there's no questions for me i'd like to bring on
mr growl uh to confirm my testimony please proceed thank you uh eric if you can please
raise your hand so you can be recognized um okay eric can you uh put your name on the record
Eric Grau, E-R-I-C-G-R-A-U.
Chairman, would you...
You swear, yeah, sir, you swear and affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Please proceed, Mr. Hellen again.
Eric, did you hear my testimony?
Do you believe it to be true and accurate?
Do you adopt it as your own?
and you purchased just to confirm you purchased the property in 2005 that's correct at the time
it was uh three dwelling units with existing leases yes and if you maintain the property
is three dwelling units continuously for the 15 years you're in the building yes
i i would now open it up for the board if you have any questions for me
thank you any questions from the board no no anyone else would anyone else like to testify
in this case if so please raise your hand we also have an additional witness who can confirm that
it's been three units over those 15 years that the board would like to testify i don't think
we'll need that person yet uh anyone else no hands at this time chair thank you planning commission
um good morning cusp of the morning this is uh greg waldman um planning commission staff
this property is zoned a two-family residential and is recommended to be rezoned to multi-family
residential in the comprehensive plan accordingly we have no objection to the granting of the
requested variance thank you mi2020-001296 4424 baltimore avenue my vote is yes
my vote is yes my vote is yes my vote is yes my vote is yes thank you thank you mr
just for clarification it is uh 4425 baltimore avenue i just want to make sure that was on the
record did i did i miss did i misstate that i apologize it's 4425 baltimore avenue yes thank
you we appreciate the board's time thank you calendar number one eight four five four forty
two west queen lane good afternoon i mean good morning it is afternoon good morning it's still
for the record and can you please spell your last name absolutely uh zenjin z-h-e-n-j-i-n 1617
john f kennedy boulevard suite 1838 philadelphia pa 19103 here on behalf of the applicant
you swear or affirm to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth
i do you also wave and stip i do and have you emailed 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 questions
and have you met with the RCO and do you have a letter? Yes to all questions. Okay great you may
proceed. Thank you. Good afternoon. I'm going to go ahead and share with the board the information
on this matter. This is a application for a new construction on a vacant lot. What I want the
board to understand is that 440 and 442 are essentially two lots that are being built together.
these are twin buildings so the number of units actually reflect it's three of each
property so total of six the refusal is attached along with the community letter from
solar germantown petition of support on our side photos plans now we also submitted list of
neighbors with three to four units photographs of the neighbors and property use records of
the neighbors. What this property is, it is a RTA1 property, which means that under the zoning
code by right, my client can build two units on each of the lot for a total of four. However,
what my client would like to do is to build six total units, but with the condition, of course,
that no unit would have more than two bedrooms. The reason why my client decided to approach the
community with this proposal is because four units, while it's by right, based on the size of
the lot and the buildings in the area, four units actually turn out to be harder to manage
with more additional bedrooms than if we had six units where we're restricting it specifically to
two bedrooms each. The density of the bedrooms actually wouldn't really change because each of
the two units would have at least three bedrooms versus three units with two bedrooms would be
essentially a wash when it comes to the total density according to bedrooms. Now the additional
units will be smaller with less bedrooms so that it will be easier to manage from the management
side. These are going to be rentals and we were very clear with the neighborhood association,
the neighbors, that this is that is the intent and that is what we see also with the neighbors
in the area. As part of RTA1, part of the refusal also indicated six parking spaces, and we're able
to put four in the front based on our design. What I want to do is actually show the plans first to
the board, and then we'll address the specifics on the community's letter. So as you can see,
the property is two buildings side by side. This is one's 440, one's 442. You'll be three units in
each. We're trying to put in the parking spaces in the front. What is actually unique about our
proposal versus what is existing on the block is that there isn't really consistent off-street
parking on the block. On our side of the block, for example, it's clear from the photo of the
properties next door that while this lot is going to put parking in the existing buildings next to
us which are also twin style with three families in each does not have any off-street parking and
in fact the parkings are for the most part on this side street on street this is a different angle
you can see that the other property has a side entrance similar to what we're proposing and
this is the other size building from our property. What we also want to point out with the design is
that the ultimate design is to propose two bedrooms, three units. And again, this property
will have a pretty substantial side and rear yard available to it so that trash management,
whether it's two units or three units will be much easier than a roll home situation because
you can access the rear space here the entire rear space by the entire building so there is
open space in the back there's actually a 20 foot deep rear yard and the width of the property also
allows the yard the actual width of the yard to be pretty substantial as well i believe it is
25 feet wide and 23 feet wide, so almost 50 foot wide in width, 20 foot deep for the rear yard area
where the trash will be placed until pickup time. The parking will be in the front. We are proposing
a curb cut in order to achieve that. So again, the layout inside will be three total units with
two bedrooms each, keeping the total bedroom counts to six bedrooms per building. Again,
it's two buildings, three units each, so the mirror image of this floor plan for the other
half of the building. We are proposing some balconies, but again, the idea was to have
proposing some balconies but again the idea was to have some additional open air for the individual
units if they're not using the rear yard. If that is an issue of course the balconies are not
something that my client must have as part of the design. This is a proposed design
based on the idea of a six unit building. I do want to also point out that this is a heavily
multi-family block, 432, 36, 38, 44. These are all addresses which my client has confirmed
have at least three units, if not more, with the other addresses on the block also have many that
are at least duplex, if not more. So on both sides of our property, we're actually surrounded by
triplex multi-family uses as well. And these are also reflected in the city records, which is
attached to our exhibit. So we have shown that these are documented three families,
they're not just illegally converted three families. So to address the community opposition,
we met with the solo Germantown Civic and they did write a pretty extensive statement
with their opposition. The key items here is that they're asking for some,
without conceding to even agreeing to any idea of anything over a duplex what they have brought up
a lot of their opposition was aesthetics of the project while we understand aesthetics is
important to the community and my client was willing to negotiate without being able to move
forward beyond we just want aesthetics without even possibility of considering six units i think
the discussion was not fruitful and therefore we did not actually get into details with what
could be concessions in the aesthetic side the community basically took the position they would
rather see a single family house here than anything else which i understand but um again this is at
least a duplex by right for each and therefore four units by right on the lot even if we were
to build completely uh by right based on the zoning code so again i want to be clear with the
zoning board that my client is willing and asking for a restriction on the number of bedrooms as
part of any decision from the board that would be in support of a six unit. And if not, the final
project would be four units. But of course, by right, the number of bedrooms would be adjusted
according to the needs of that design. My client did try to get a petition herself for the
neighboring property. But the issue is that they're mostly rentals. And therefore, most of the tenants
were not willing to actually get involved with a petition in this case and both properties on both
sides are actually set up for a triplex use on each of the house as well so that is again the
community is in opposition i want to be cleared out again with the board but once again my client
understand that there's no legal hardship because it's a new construction but what we're asking for
the board is kind of a more reasonable layout for the property in the sense that six units with
limitation to two bedrooms, no more than two bedrooms each, just makes more sense here than
larger two units. I'm certainly happy to answer any questions from the board at this time.
And if you want me to direct to a particular exhibit, I will be happy to do so. Thank you.
Do you need to get your client on? Yes, my client is here by phone. Let me pull up the information
real quick to make sure that it might be shown as a phone number.
My apologies.
I'm just pulling up the information.
I have the last four digits or you can just ask your client to raise his hand.
I believe I have the last four digits here.
That's why I'm actually trying to pull up my apologies because there was a lot of information
going through so last four digits is one six five five um it should be uh pinkus
caller ended in one six five five you can um unmute yourself and just say your name for the record
they could press star six
caller you will have to press star six so that you can speak
mr jen in the interest of time as an officer of the court will stipulate that your client
would adopt your testimony are there any other questions are there any questions from the
Thank you.
Are there any other questions?
Are there any questions from the board?
board. No.
Anyone else who would like to testify in this case, please raise your hand.
Yes, Chair, we have Mr. Charles Richardson.
Good afternoon, Mr. Richardson.
Please identify yourself with a record.
You're still under oath from this morning.
Good afternoon, Mr. Chair.
Charles Richardson from the office of Councilwoman Cindy Bass, room 312 City Hall.
The applicant met with the RCO, and the RCO had some very specific things that they were looking for in the case that they have come out against this.
And in fact, the Councilwoman is supporting the RCO.
The property that is being proposed to be built looks nothing like anything that's smack dab in the middle of a block.
And then it looks nothing like anything that is in the neighborhood at all.
The density that they're asking for is too high.
And, you know, if they're going to build something, they should go with their buy right, if anything else.
But again, they need to try to conform more with what actually exists in the neighborhood,
as opposed to trying to put something that looks totally different and is out of character
with the properties in the neighborhood. So the Councilwoman is in objection to granting this.
Thank you. Anyone else?
Yes, Chair, we have a, I'm sorry, never mind.
To address that again, Chairman, just to be clear, when we met at the RCO, we were never
really able to get into the aesthetics because the RCO is taking a hardline position against
any variance whatsoever.
In the case of a by right build, the aesthetics would be what my client would be building
based on their by right design so that is why the aesthetics were not further discussed at that
meeting because we were not able to get past the issue of the number of units yeah thank you
i'm sorry you can go ahead keychain i'm sorry uh we have a um miss allison but if you want to speak
first miss tye you can no i just wanted to make sure we got allison from solo miss weiss
Ms. Weiss, good afternoon. Please identify yourself with the record, and I'll swear you in.
Allison Weiss, A-double-L-I-S-O-N-W-E-I-S-S.
Thank you.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Please proceed.
Yes, we are the RCO, and we hosted the meeting, and we submitted our letter, as Mr. Jim has referred to it, but I wanted to make sure there are many community members that wanted to attend this meeting and voice their opposition, so I wanted to make sure they had an opportunity to speak.
well they will but we're we're just not we're not going to entertain anything uh
from everyone we want the same same message from everyone uh no disrespect if something new and
different uh that would be helpful but if not we'll just recognize that there are other people
who are in attendance who are be who oppose this project yes and we we do have an opportunity to
to touch on aesthetics but the community is opposed so thank you i'm sorry i missed that
first part about the aesthetics what was that we did have an opportunity to speak on the aesthetics
and the neighbors were unhappy with the proposal the balconies that no other property in the
near area so let me ask you this i mean the the mr jen said that the balconies
were not that important they would have be willing to remove it is there is there any
opportunity do you think there's an opportunity to have further conversation on this matter
and aesthetics aside because that's not an issue for the board only if it is for a twin at most
okay that's what I wanted to get at okay thank you thank you anyone else
planning commission.
Good afternoon. My name is Greg Walden, planning commission staff.
This property is done to family residential and is recommended to remain as such in the
comprehensive plan. We believe that six units is an overuse for the site. The applicant would
The applicant would have been permitted to build four buy-write units if the lots were not consolidated.
have been permitted to build four buy right units if the loss were not worth.
We also believe that the proposed front-loaded parking with continuous curb cut would have an adverse impact to the block.
Accordingly, we recommend that the requested variants not be granted.
Thank you.
MI 2020-001845442 West Queen Lane, my vote is no.
my vote is no my vote is no my vote is no thank you thank you calendar number 1765
879 marcella street
this is sharon saletta the property owner's name is tanya solomon i believe she's representing
herself. Thank you. Good afternoon, Ms. Solomon. She's coming in as a panelist now, Chair. Thank you.
good afternoon
you have two devices on
if you can turn off the one you're not going to use okay it's off all right okay can you put your