thank you thank you all
number five mi 2022 004 362 519 south 9th street matthew monroe is the attorney
no rco letter applicant advised rco of amended refusal
uh mr chair this is hillary we actually have an update um from that from this afternoon
we received um a letter there were two rcos that were involved in this case we received a letter
of non-opposition from South Street Head House District. We also received a letter of non-opposition
from Washington Square West Civic Association, and they also requested a proviso limiting the
visitor accommodation variance request to two years. Lastly, we received a letter of non-opposition
from Council Member Squilla with the proviso requested by Washington Square. Thank you.
Two years. Two years is what was requested, Mr. Chair. Okay.
Good evening, Chairman Bergman, members of the board. Could you state your name,
please, Mr. Monroe, and spell, please, for the court reporter? Happy to. Good evening,
Chairman Bergman, Matthew Monroe, M-A-T-T-H-E-W-M-O-N-R-O-E. All right. Do you swear
or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? I do. Could you identify
your client and the relationship to the property uh yes um both my clients are here uh patty wong
is a managing member of the llc that owns the property and initially filed for the application
and petition for appeal okay for the physical accommodations and sally uh bingham who is the
owner of the the uh tenant the down mr monroe could you speak up just a little bit we're having
hard time just a little bit get closer sure sure and i also have sally bingham who is the um who
is the uh owner of uh sanctuary on second it's a uh a massage studio right and uh they're the
prospective tenant uh sally is here with us as well okay and uh just to clarify can uh can can
Can you see my screen?
I've got that.
I can, hold on one minute.
hold on one minute mr hallman do you have a few questions for good afternoon council do you agree
Mr. Holliman, do you have a few questions for?
Good afternoon, councilor.
i'm sorry mr hallman you broke up there do you do you agree to waive the reading
of the refusal and stipulate yes yes i do and all your appropriate paperwork has been sent in
I'll move on. Can you hear me? I'm having a little problem with my internet.
He's good. He's good. He's ready to go, Thomas.
Okay, good.
Yeah, and I did send in the paperwork five days before the hearing. I did, as Ms. Hillary Emerson.
Yeah, that's fine. Go ahead.
Yeah, updated it. So we have all the documents here, the deeds, the lease. And I just want to note that Ms. Wong filed the appeal initially. The building had been zoned commercially and there was a, she listed the use on the first floor as a professional office as it had been in the past.
so the amended refusal is states that it is for personal services in a massage studio
the board has already recognized that this property and i'll just show you this is a
property that was owned rm1 it has been but the board has already recognized that there is a
hardship on this property on two separate occasions the first time in 1994 there was a
first variance that was granted to build the building and to create a daycare for up to 50
up to 50 kids and then again in 2004 because there was an existing commercial space
there was another application for an infill development along with for a medical office
and a professional office and uses that were permitted in the ca zoning district at that time
and you can see here that that was also granted and the building itself was built out as a
commercial space. I'll show the board some photos for context. Here's an outside picture of the
building. This is the ground floor space. On the ground floor there's no kitchen, no laundry,
no basin. The reason why I'm explaining this to the board is because this building presents a
classic Hertzberg hardship where you have an existing building they don't have to go in and
put in a whole bunch of new infrastructure uh to retrofit the building to meet um uh the the zone
the requirements of an underlying multi-family zoning district it's an existing commercial space
it's always been used as a commercial space and the question of whether this is uh the least
modification possible uh to to provide relief from the code um number one um miss wong and her husband
will be running the Airbnb that's proposed for the visitor accommodations on the second floor.
It's just going to be a single unit. Ms. Wong is a, she's a CPA. She worked for the federal
government and she's retired. And her husband is a retired Philadelphia police detective.
They plan on running this together. They run a clean operation. And Sally, who has, as I mentioned
Port has a successful, highly professional personal massage studio right now on Second
Street, and it was coincidentally, I will say, I've been there myself, and it is a very
professional, relaxing environment, very quiet, and to get into the question of whether this
is the least modification possible, effectively, this is a down zoning from what the original
use was as a daycare um as you know there's pick up and drop off issues this will be a seamless
operation um uh then as i mentioned before the airbnb is going to have one unit it's going to
be run by a professional couple um and uh they're going to be doing all the cleaning themselves
they don't tolerate partying that sort of thing this is primarily set for families uh and that's
that's who they target with their marketing, and that's the customers that they receive
and that they expect to receive. We do have a tax clearance, as you see here, and we do have
non-opposition letters. I will say that I understand there was a request to limit the
two-year variance to two years by the Washington West Civic Association, as Ms. Emerson noted in
the preamble. Try to get closer to the mic, Matthew. Yes, sorry. I was just going to say,
I know that the Washington Square West Civic Association requested a limitation of two years
for the Airbnb. I would only ask that Ms. Wong and her
for the Airbnb. I would only ask that Ms. Wong and her husband have owned the building for
about six or seven years now, maybe longer, and she can correct me on that. They intend to continue
owning and operating it. So if there is going to be a limitation on time, I would ask that it not
be for two years, but it'd be sometime much longer, maybe six to eight years, because they do plan on
continuing to operate that. The head house district, which was the coordinating RCO, did not
request any limitation, and there was no limitation requested for the personal services
and massage studio. With that, I don't want to take up any more of your time. It's been a long
day. Do you have somebody to adopt your testimony? Yes. Ms. Wong, can you raise your virtual hand?
There should be a button, just a hand on your phone.
I don't know how to speak.
Hi, could you state your name and spell for the court reporter, please?
Hello, yes, my name is Patty Wong.
Can you spell your name?
Yes, my name is Patty Wong, W-O-N-G.
Right, do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Did you hear the factual statements I made on the record?
Were they accurate?
Yes. I owned the property for 10 years.
10 years. Sorry. I thought that I might have been wrong about that. So you owned it for 10 years.
Were my statements, aside from that statement about ownership, were they accurate?
Do you adopt them as your testimony?
Questions from the board?
No, Mr. Chairman.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
i do not see any further answers the chair no more no further hands thank you
planning commission this is around bednar city planning the property is indicated for residential
use on the city plan adopted district plan recommends no change the existing zoning at
this location the applicant's hardship is not supported with evidence of any physical
circumstances or condition of the property that would prevent it from being used in performing
with the code both visitor accommodations and personal services are prohibited therefore we
recommend request variance not be granted um i understand my position if i could just make
one quick comment just to say that once again uh the evidence that we've presented is is
effectively the testimony but it uh this was a building that was built as a commercial use
Matthew, get closer to the mic. We're having a hard time hearing you.
Sure. This is a building that was built for commercial use pursuant to a variance and has always been used for commercial uses pursuant to a variance.
And we just simply want to continue that use.
Okay. Thank you.
So MI-2022-004-362-519-South 9th Street, I vote yes for personal services.
I vote yes for visitor accommodations with expiration date for a temporary variance of 1-1-26, three years.
thomas thomas holland my vote is yes with proviso jane snell my vote is yes with proviso
ishmael shaheed my vote is yes with proviso thank you counsel thank you appreciate your time
have a great night happy holidays excuse me mr chair did you um vote this with the amended refusal
i i probably did not okay i'm sorry
we'll go back one more time thank you so mi 2022 004 362 519 south 9th street
i vote yes for personal sir for personal services i vote yes for a visitor accommodation
with an expiration date of a temporary variance of 1-1-26 and proviso per amended refusal dated
10-21-22. Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes with provisos. James Snell, my vote is yes with provisos.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes with provisos. Thank you. Thank you, Councilman. Thank you.
Happy holidays, everyone.
Thank you.
Number six, MI 2022-004-389-1221-1222, North 41st Street.
1222 North 41st Street. Henry Clinton is the attorney. No RCO letter.
Henry Clinton is the attorney.
Mr. Clinton will be back in as a panelist.
Mr. Chair, we do have an update on this one. We do not have an RCO letter from the coordinating RCO, which was Centennial Parkside CDC,
see, but we did receive a letter of support based on the revised plans from East Parkside
Residents Association, which was an affected RCO. Okay, thank you.
Good evening, Mr. Chairman. Hi, Mr. Clinton, you have two cases, the last two cases of the day,
and what we're going to do is do them one at a time. We think they're a little bit different.
So could you identify your client and the relationship to the property?
for 1222. 1222. My client is Keith Sheed, S-H-E-E-D, and he's on the call. He is the owner
and developer of the property. Okay. Mr. Holloman has a couple quick questions for you.
Good afternoon, counsel. Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to his
accuracy? I do. Did you email all of the exhibits and documents that's required, such as proof of
ownership, tax clearance, copy of the refusal, pictures or drawings of the property, five
days in advance to this hearing, and did you meet with the RCO and do you have a letter?
Yes, I have a letter from one of the RCOs.
Thank you.
Please proceed and share your screen.
Thank you, Mr. Holliman.
did you see that Mr. Chairman it didn't come up yet Henry all right maybe a delay
maybe you have to go out and come back in again Henry that's what happened the last time we had
this okay I'll leave right and then come back in all right okay
Let's try it again.
Is that visible?
All right.
Let me go.
I'll leave the entire, I'll leave the meeting and then come back.
Okay, sure.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Jason, do we have to let him back in?
Okay, please.
Excuse me.
Mr. Clinton is on his way back in as a panelist, sir.
I'm back, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you.
Let me start this again.
All right.
Thank you for your patience on this one.
So, good evening, Mr. Chairman, members of the board, Henry Clinton for the applicant, Kishi.
This is my presentation package containing exhibits AA through A11, which I ask to be admitted into evidence.
I'll run through each of them as are pertinent, and I'll concentrate also on the zoning records for this particular block.
The refusal, there are two refusals, but we've eliminated one refusal with plans that have been changed based on the feedback from the community.
we were able to set the house back equal to the front face of this other single house
or apartment building that exists on this block.
So by way of background, we're asking for three units in this property.
three units in this property. It's a long vacant lot based on historical records. It's been vacant
It's a long, vacant lot.
since at least 2004. Not only this property, but the property next to it. This property happens
to be on the corner right on 41st Street. We do have a letter from East Parkside Residents
Association. You'll see from my notice letter that I'll show you later on in the presentation
that we did notify both RCOs and Centennial was at the meeting, East Parkside was at the meeting,
and East Parkside has forwarded this letter of support only after we made certain changes to
the plans, which I will show the board. So just for perspective purposes, this is Parkside Avenue,
Memorial Hall is over here.
41st Street is right here.
And these are a number of vacant lots on the north side of 41st Street.
And there's also vacant lots on the south side of 41st Street.
The property is primarily multifamily in existence and those that have been approved within the last year, which I will show the panel as you move forward.
A closer perspective, 1222 is on the corner. 1220 is one property in. These are vacant lots. This is really the only house which faces 41st Street on this block between Girard and Parkside. This is a corner property, multifamily, but it faces Girard Avenue.
a closer perspective again here's a quadplex four-unit building we're at the very corner
this is a church across the street three stories another perspective just looking the opposite way
on the block showing you the existing four-family property and one of the refusals that we had which
which we eliminated originally our plan showed our house coming out closer to the sidewalk we
have since pushed it back 13 feet. So now the front facade of our building, if approved,
will match the front facade of the existing property. This is one of the new multifamily
across the street, directly across the street from this property that has been approved
within the last year. Proof of our zoning notices and our plans. We did make a revision,