Good morning, everyone.
My name is Bill Bergman, and I will be chairing this morning.
Hold on, Mr. Chair.
The attendees are just coming in.
I thought you said they were on.
I'm sorry, Chair.
No, it's okay.
All right. We're at 40 attendees, Chair. You can proceed as you wish.
Thank you. Good morning, everyone. My name is Bill Bergman, and I will be chairing this morning's EBA hearings.
With me is our Vice Chair, Ismail Shahid.
Present, Mr. Chairman.
Our Board Member, Thomas Holloman, is struggling to get in.
Mr. Holloman.
And our alternate Board Member, Emily Persico, from Development Services.
Present, Mr. Chair.
Also present is Hillary Emerson, our attorney, and our executive director, Tanya Sunkett.
Here's our virtual format.
Be advised, the proceedings are being recorded.
Video will be available by contacting tanyasunkett at phil .gov.
For the benefit of our court stenographer, we ask attorneys and witnesses to identify themselves before testifying.
If you're participating by phone and you wish to testify, press star 9 to raise your hand and star 6 to unmute.
To enter an appearance statement, call 267 -270 -5548.
Leave your email and address the property question.
And finally, the question answer box on the screen is not for comments or testimony.
All comments should be directed to our executive director, Tanya Sunkett.
let's look at this morning's schedule number eight mi 2023 000 901 1402 wharton street
that case is continued are there any comments relative to that case
good morning chair this is jevette benton i'll be your co -host for today
We have a caller with the last four digits, nine, one, seven, six.
I'm sorry.
I'm sorry.
This is Tanya Yvette.
I hate to interrupt, but that's Mr. Holloman.
All righty.
I'll change the name.
Chair, we have no one else's hand up at this time.
Are there any other requests for continuances?
chair we have uh Leonard Reuter with his hand up okay good morning Mr. Reuter
good morning why could you state your name for the record please
for the court reporter sure Leonard F. Reuter R -E -U -T -E -R senior attorney for the city of
Philadelphia right do you swear for him to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth
I do. Is this about case number 11? I believe so. 2940 East Tioga.
Let's see here. Yes. Is Mr. DeMarco on the line?
Chair, I have a mute. Mr. DeMarco. Thank you. Mr. DeMarco, could you state your name,
please, and spell for the court stenographer? Sure. Good morning. Richard DeMarco,
last name d -e -m -a -r -c -o right do you swear for him to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing
but the truth i do leonard why don't you go first sure um this uh morning i discovered that there
was a problem uh with this this is an appeal from a zoning violation so it's a an appeal against l
and i um what i had discovered and it's it's it's my fault entirely that i didn't learn
discover it sooner is the violation at issue in this that that's the subject of this appeal was
actually marked complied but that was we believe that was done in error and in fact the very same
day it was marked complied a new violation was issued I'm not sure that Mr. DeMarco's client
got that but I just provided them with copies of the new violation that was not appealed
uh technically it's too late to file that appeal but i would leave it to the discussion of the
board whether they would accept i wouldn't oppose a a non -protunk appeal uh the question i have is
whether because this violation was marked complied uh i don't because the way the eclipse system
works i don't know that if the regardless of which way the board goes on the underlying facts
I don't know what impact, if any, it would have on this actual violation in the Eclipse system. I think they actually have to file the appeal under the new violation, and we would have to proceed with that at a later date.
under the new violation and we would have to proceed with that at a later date i'm kind of
not i'll be honest with you i just want to present this to the board because um i and i would leave
it up to uh the board or or miss sunk uh mrs sunk ms sunk and ms uh emerson to determine what would
be the best way forward um and again i apologize to everybody uh but it's just it's just a weird
situation. Normally, I would say, let's just go forward with this appeal, and then we'll just
apply whatever the decision is to the new violation. I just don't think that's possible
the way the system is set up, but I could be wrong. So I had a quick conversation earlier
with Hillary about this, and we think we should continue this case and try to work it out and
see where we stand with it. Mr. DeMarco? I mean, I'll do whatever the board wants.
i i i from what i can see in the few minutes that i had to look at the new violation that
we were not served um i guess a continuance is i'm not going to be upset about it but
yeah it seems to be identical so i'm very confused yeah again i i like i said i i it
i don't want to here's if i may let len if i may i don't want to i don't know why i'd have to file
another make the client pay another fee for an appeal when it's the identical violation that
is under appeal i mean if there's a way to do it let me let me say this why don't we do this why
don't we figure this out we don't have to debate this yeah i don't know why don't we just continue
yeah that's what i was gonna say yeah because the the current appeal is tied to the violation
that has now been closed so we need to we we need to address that and we can discuss issues related
to fees and such um you know off offline so why don't we continue this and we can work it out
yeah i'm just going to just let everybody know i'm going to ask that the fee the appeal fee be
waived in light of the mistake by the city okay so thank you yeah mi 2023 003050 2940 east
Tioga Street, the cases continue. Thank you. Okay, thank you. Thank you. Thank you, everyone.
Thank you. All right, so we're going to go to cases that we do not have exhibits for.
Number one, MI 2023 -000966 -2943 -45 Ridge Avenue. Akbar Brown is the listed owner.
Ambrose Chukwana is the listed applicant. No exhibits first listing.
Chair, I see no hands at this time. MI 2023 -000 -966 -2943 -45 Ridge Avenue. That case is
discontinued. Mark must be tried. Number two, MI 2022 -007 -379 -3695 Kensington Avenue. No exhibit,
second listing. Louis Garcia is the listed applicant. Paul Strauss is the listed owner.
chair i see no hands at this time okay um mi 2022 007 379 3695 kensington avenue
this is the second listing i vote to dismiss
ishmael shaheed my vote is to dismiss
Emily Persego, my vote is to dismiss.
Thank you.
Number four.
MI 2022 -004 -030 -9311, Voight Slane.
Yannick Patel, Bhaskar Patel, Amala Patel are the owners.
Pro se. No exhibits. Third listing.
Chair, we have someone by the last name O 'Hara with their hand up.
They've been unmuted and allowed to speak.
Could you state your name, please, and spell for the court stenographer?
Yes, sir, Mr. Chairman. Jack O 'Hara, O -H -A -R -A.
I am the president of the RCO, the Greater Boston Civic League.
All right. Do you swear or firm to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Proceed, sir.
The notice I received, there's not a posting on the property for this hearing.
This is the third continuance, I believe.
A lot of back and forth between the applicant and the RCO regarding their presentation to us.
A letter I sent yesterday explaining the history is a little bit confusing, but they began a presentation and then withdrew it, saying that they would come back with revised plans.
A letter I sent yesterday explaining the history is a little bit
A lot of back and forth between the applicant and the RCO. None of that occurred. New plans were never received. A presentation and vote never occurred at the RCO.
Thank you very much. Hold on one minute. Janak Patel, Vaskar Patel, Mala Patel, the owner's applicants, are they present?
Chair, I see someone with the last name Patel. They just put their hand up.
They've been unmuted, Chair.
Hi, could you state your name, please, as well for the court sonographer?
Yes. My name is Bharat Patel.
Please spell your name for the court reporter.
B -H -A -R -A -T.
You swear for him to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Yes, sir, I do.
You're a neighbor in this case, am I correct?
That is correct.
So I still need to see if the owners are here.
Janak Patel, Bhaskar Patel, or Mahala Patel, are they present?
i'm sorry cheer this is tanya that was patel it appears yeah but he's the neighbor okay
iraq patel is a neighbor am i right mr patel
okay so mi 2022 004 030 93 11 voids lane this is the third listen we should not have exhibits
I vote to dismiss.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is to dismiss.
Emily Persico, my vote is to dismiss.
Thank you.
Number six.
MI 2022 -007 -383 -1440 Hellerman Street.
Enaldo Valentino is the owner pro se.
No exhibits, second listing.
Do we see an owner?
I'm unmuting them now, Chair.
Pardon me?
I'm unmuting them now.
Good morning.
This is Enaldo Valentino.
Hi, could you spell your name, please, for the court report?
Sure. First name, E -N -E -L -I -D -O. Last name, Valentin, V -A -L -E -N -T -I -N.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Sir, we do not have any exhibits from you, and there's no record of an RCO meeting. Am I correct?
I do have an exhibit. I located a permit which was issued in the 1940s, which is so -
Yeah, but I mean, what I'm saying, sir, we have not received anything from you.
Okay, that's correct, yes.
All right.
And you have not had RCO meetings as of yet, right?
Am I right?
Yes, that's correct.
Because somebody came over my house, my property, and they inspected it, and they saw that it was properly divided into two units.
So here's where we are.
I'm going to continue this case.
You have to be ready for the next hearing.
And you have to have an RCO meeting, et cetera.
If not, we're going to dismiss it.
So MI 2022 -007 -383 -1440 Hellerman Street.
Case is continued.
Mark must be tried.
Okay, sir?
May I ask you a question?
How do I submit an exhibit?
I'm sorry, Chair.
Go ahead.
Mr. Valentin, if you can reach out to our office where the documents came to you in the mail, we'll assist.
Thank you so much, Chair.
Okay. Thank you. Thank you, sir. All right. Is Thomas Holloman on?
Chair, I'm not sure if he's on or not. I see his name, but I don't know if his phone number is here.
Okay. Mr. Holloman?
Mr. Holloman, if you're on, could you please raise your virtual hand, please?
chair there are no hands up at this moment okay so what we're going to do is we'll hold off on
the add -ons we're going to go to our regular list first okay okay all right number seven
OK. All right. Number seven. We're going to start with number seven.
we're going to start with number seven
MI 2023 -000970 -4200 North Street.
Ken Ong is the owner applicant.
Mr. Ong? He's coming back in as a panelist now, Chair.
Thank you.
chair if i may this is tanya just a wee bit of housekeeping at the moment
you most certainly and mr holliman i'm going to unmute you and see how it works
good morning mr holliman
patina could you check and see if you have a hand for
mr halliman yeah i see no hands at this time on panelists or attendees wait a minute something
just came up that would be him okay unmute and make sure he works sure mr halliman are you able
to hear and speak yep perfect okay we will mute you until it's time for you to speak
chair thank you very kindly so why why don't we do this let's go back to tell mr
Mr. Ong will be with him shortly. Let's go back to our admins and take care of them, okay?
So, number one, MI 2022 -001 -058 -332 Delancey Street. At the request of the parties,
the vote in this matter has been scheduled to Wednesday, August 16th at 9 .30 a .m.
Number two, MI 2022, 0007 -480 -1310 South Broad Street.
I vote here.
Wait a minute.
I'll be right with you.
I vote yes, with provisos.
As per supplemental findings of fact and conclusions of law adopted by the ZBA on August 2, 2023, this approval is for a multifamily household living with a maximum of three dwelling units, one per floor.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes with proviso.
Thank you.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes, with providing time.
Thank you.
Number three, MI 2022, 004 -678 -6252, Lime Kill Pike, I vote no.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is no.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is no.
Number four, MI -2022, 004 -789 -1821, Natrona Street, I vote no.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is no.
Mr. Holloman, this is Hillary. Can you please certify on the record that you watched the video?
Can we unmute Mr. Holloman again, please?
Mr. Howland, please unmute yourself.
I do certify that I did watch the video on July 26, 2023.
Thank you.
it's you know shaheed my vote is no number five mi2022 006 988 1124 to 28 dickinson street
we're going to have a short resumptive hearing david orphanetes and joel rosen please
chair joel rosen is coming back in as a panelist now good morning mr rosen
Mr. Orphanides is also coming back in as a panelist now, Chair.
All right. Good morning, Mr. Orphanides. Mr. Rosen, could you state your name, please, and spell for the court sonographer?
All right. Good morning, Mr. Orphanides.
Mr. Rosen, could you...
Joel Rosen, R -O -S -E -N.
Right. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Mr. Orphanides?
Yes, sir.
Hi. Could you state your name, please?
Sorry. David Orphanides, O -R -P -H -A -N -I -D -E -S.
Right. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Mr. Orphanidis, do you want to start?
Certainly. Yes. And I think maybe more of the discussion or conversation will be by Mr. Rosen.
But at the time of our last hearing, we had completed the presentation of the case in chief.
And I believe Mr. Rosen, it was his turn to proceed as representing three neighbors and budding property owners.
And between that time and now, we've entered into negotiations to revise the design for the project to pull the back of the building in to make the building shorter so it doesn't extend as deep behind his client's properties.
We've provided those revised plans to the zoning board attorney with the revised proviso plan form, as well as letters now of non -opposition from Mr. Rosen's clients, his three clients.
Those letters and those plans have all been submitted to the zoning board attorney.
Those those revised plans are referenced.
The date of those revised plans are referenced in the new updated letters of non -opposition from Mr. Rosen's clients, again, that were submitted to the to the zoning board attorney.
So with that, I don't believe that there were any, and Mr. Rosen can jump in after I'm done, but I don't believe there were at the time of the last hearing that there were any other parties in opposition.
And as you know, this is a matter that has the non -opposition of both the community group and the councilman.
Okay. Mr. Rosen?
Yes. For the record, I represent three neighbors, Leslie Elder, David Fortino, and Kevin Rosen.
we initially filed opposition to the original plans filed by the petitioner. I've had subsequent
conversations with Mr. Orfanides. Based upon the new and most recent drawings that have been filed,
my client, on behalf of my clients, I'm withdrawing that opposition, and we have
submitted, and I think Mr. Orfanides has given copies to the board, we have filed letters of
non -opposition on behalf of those uh three neighbors ms elder mr rosen and uh mr 14o
thank you very much hillary we go to planning for this right that's correct mr planning
thank you chair uh david effecto f -e -c -t -e -a -u with the city planning commission
Do you swear for him to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, sir, I do.
Proceed.
Mr. Chairman and board members, good morning.
This property is indicated for residential use on the city plan.
Our adopted district plan recommended no change to the existing zoning at this location.
The applicant's hardship is not supported with evidence of unique physical conditions
or circumstances of the property that would prevent it from being used in conformance
with the code.
Therefore, we recommend that the requested variances not be granted.
Thank you.
I can address that, but I think in every respect, the property is incredibly uniquely configured if you take a look at the plans, and it's way too large for a single -family dwelling.
So MI 2022, 006 -988 -1124 -28, Dickinson Street, I vote yes, with provisos.
Permended refusal dated 10 -25 -22, revised plans, four pages, stamped by ZBA on August 2nd, 2023.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes, with proviso.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes with Proviso.
Thank you to both counsel. Thank you.
Thank you. Have a nice day.
That concludes my business.
We're going to go back to number seven, which is a per se.
MI 2023, 000970, 4200 North Rea Street.
10 Ung is the owner.
There's a letter of non -opposition from Esperanza and a letter of non -opposition from Councilmember
Lozada.
Can Og please unmute yourself?
Ken Ong, please unmute yourself.
Good morning, Mr. Chairman.
Good morning, sir.
Could you state your name, please?
Yes, my name is Ken Ong.
First name is Ken, K -H -E -N.
That's the name Ong, U -N -G.
Right.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Could you turn your video on, please?
Sorry.
Okay, fine.
Thank you.
This application is for a takeout restaurant on the first floor in the same building with a single -family household living above.
The proposed takeout restaurant requires special exception approval in the CMX2 zoning district.
Our vice chair has just a few questions for you, sir.
Good morning, sir.
Have you emailed in all the exhibits and documents that are needed to proceed with this case five days in advance of the period?
Please proceed and share the screen.
Good morning Mr Chairman and board members.
My name is Ken Ong. I am the owner of 4200 North Reef Street, and the reason I'm here is to request for your approval on opening a takeout restaurant at this location.
This is just a Google map to show the location of the property.
It's located right at the corner of North Reef Street and Hunter Park Avenue.
It's one block away from 5th Street, which is a busy avenue around the area.
so what what my plans do is basically introducing a new cuisine to the neighborhood uh the surrounding
neighbors are predominantly hispanic and uh there's not many vietnamese restaurants around so
this is our plant and uh we currently have a restaurant open on germantown avenue
uh which is about like two miles away from there and the business where very welcome by the
neighborhood so so this place is previously many years ago was a restaurant and um
and we like to like bring it back with with a new cuisine
so this is just some of the interior pictures the first picture is when you stand up front
and look into the back the second picture will be from saying from the back look toward the front
and the last picture will be the uh the room in the back which is a small room with a half
bath and then the exits to the uh the backyard
This is just my own sketch of how I envision this to be.
So it's going to be a window takeout, and on the front of the store, there will be a
takeout window where the order will be placed, and then pick up from there.
On top of the window will be a large awnings, which is going to provide shades and shades
for in sunny day and then protection from from the rain if you're per se and then lastly this
is just my uh own sketch of the uh the fall plan of how i envision it to be so in the back room
over here as you see there's not too much too many room back there and there's already a half bath
so a kitchen will predominantly take up the whole areas of the front
And therefore, we decided to do like a window takeout rather than like a dine in restaurants.
And with that being said.
So, Mr. Ong, you went to the Esperanza, right, and presented your case?
Yes, I did.
And they're in non -opposition to your matter?
That's correct, yep.
and we also have a letter from the council member Lozada saying she's in non -opposition
yes okay thank you questions from the board
no chair no mr chairman no mr chairman thank you questions or comments from the virtual audience
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
Chair, I see no hands at this time.
Planning Commission.
Thank you, Chair Bergman, and good morning, David Fecto with the City Planning Commission.
The comprehensive plan recommends no change to the commercial mixed -use zoning at this location.
The appellant has shown that the proposed takeout restaurant will have no detrimental impacts to the neighborhood beyond what might be expected from this use.
the city planning commission recommends the board grant the proposed special exception
for a takeout restaurant thank you mi 2023 000 970 4200 north reese street i vote yes
thomas holliman my vote is yes
ishmael shaheed my vote is yes thank you sir thank you mr tamar okay all right so we're going to go
to number nine, which is also a pro se, MI -2023 -00972 -313 Somerset Street.
Louis Mena is the owner applicant.
There is a letter of support from HACE and a letter of non -opposition from Council Member
Lozada.
The applicant also provided a petition in support signed by 54 neighbors.
Karen, Luis Mena is coming back in as a panelist now.
Can you hear me?
Could you state your name, please, and spell for the court stenographer?
My name is Luis Mena, M -E -N -A.
Right.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Right.
So this application is for the erection of a semi -detached structure for use as vacant commercial space on the first floor level with two -family household living above, size and location as seen.
The proposed use two -family household living is prohibited in the RSA 5 zoning district.
The proposed unit vacant commercial space is prohibited in the RSA 5 zoning district.
ZBA cannot approve this variance.
our vice chair has a few questions for you sir good morning sir have you emailed them all the
required documents and exhibits that are needed to proceed in this case in advance of this hearing
yes i have thank you please proceed and share your screen mr chair this is hillary i i just
wanted to to interject um for mr mayna um as you heard that the chair read the variance for vacant
commercial space um it's not a variance that the board can actually approve um either the space is
vacant or there's a specific use that the board is approving um if there is not a specific use
the board's approving today you will need to come back to the zoning board once it's been determined
what commercial use you will have in the space does that make sense mr mayna yes okay just wanted
to be clear on that thank you uh everybody see my screen we can share okay sorry i'll just go back
so this is the um appeal application for appeal that i did um once it was denied um and please
Please slow me down if I'm going too fast or you guys want to check anything out.
Just zoom out a little bit.
This is the reason why I peeled the decision.
It's a new construction I'm doing in this location.
This is the project information, the details.
These are some of the property information of that location.
um this is uh the tax letter i got uh just recently uh clear all my properties of taxes
or anything like that um this is the zone of where the property is at as you can see right
here it's a vacant lot at the moment this is uh i'm sorry i have the picture uh on the sideways
but uh this is the side and the front view of the property how it will look
this is the side and the front view of the property how it will look
once again um these are the first floor this will be the commercial area this will be the side
entrance to the unit uh second unit and third floor unit uh here you have the second floor unit
which will be a two bed one here another one here bathroom right over here and kitchen and living
room area right back here with the entrance on the side on the back of the building as well here
same thing two bedrooms um same same sketch same layout uh back of uh the property will be the
entrance here is a picture of the property on the side view of the street
same same picture side view this is the front at the moment we have a gate so we
don't have no trash or anything you know inside the property once again this is
still the back of the lot side of the line is still same thing this is the
front better view of the front this is the letter just letting everyone know
about this hearing as well to the community it was posted this is still
the side of it the side that's the picture of it was posted out front as
well this is the notice this was published these are all the supporting
signatures from neighbors around the area we went around door -to -door these
are the certified receipts that we mailed out um about these hearings to all the neighboring neighbors
and that's pretty much it yeah guys have any questions mr man this is all new construction
yes sir okay are there other multiple family units in the area
i yes there is i believe there is yes okay questions from the board
no chair no mr chairman questions or comments from the virtual audience
chair i see no hands at this time planning commission thank you mr chairman and good
morning david effecta with the city planning commission the comprehensive plan recommends
no change to the residential single family zoning at this location there is no unique physical
condition or circumstance of this 1218 square foot lot that would prevent it from being used
in conformance with the zoning code the city planning commission recommends the board deny
the proposed use variances for two -family household living and vacant commercial space thank you
MI 2023 000 972 313 West Somerset Street. I vote yes with proviso. This approval is for
two -family household living only. Use registration required for vacant commercial space prior to
occupancy. Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes with proviso.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes with proviso. Thank you, sir.
Thank you. You have your votes. Thank you. We're going to go back to number three. MI 2023
03 -000 -820 -2468, Frankfurt Avenue.
Jennifer Bazzillo is the attorney for Daniel Welsh.
Letter of support from East Kensington Neighborhood Association.
Letter of support from Fishtown Kensington Area Business Improvement District.
And a letter of opposition, non -opposition from Council Member Squilla.
Counsel, could you state your name and spell, please, for the court stenographer?
There you go.
My name is Jennifer Bazidlo, B -A -Z -Y -D -L -O.
Right.
Do you swear a firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Could you identify your client, a relationship to this property?
Sure. His name is Daniel Welsh, and he has been the owner of the property since 2005.
His name is Daniel Welsh, and he has been the owner of the property since 2005.
And our vice chair has just a few questions.
Great.
Good morning, counsel. Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
I do agree to waive the reading of the refusal, but I don't think it's completely accurate.
Understood.
I've emailed them all the required documents and exhibits that are needed to proceed with this case five days in advance.
Yes, I did.
Thank you. Please proceed and share your screen.
All right. Let me just move this over here so I can go.
Okay. So, like I said, my name is Jennifer Basidlo and I'm here representing the property owner, Daniel Welch,
who's owned this property since 2005.
In the packet, I'm just going to go briefly through
and we'll come back and revisit most of these exhibits.
But refusals, we'll get into this later, obviously.
Project information form,
deed showing that he is in fact the owner of the property,
proof that there's no property taxes owed,
the letter of support from ECNA,
the letter of non -opposition from Fishtown bid.
This, I actually emailed the board this morning. I just got these letters from the near neighbors,
both adjacent and to the rear of the property. So there's like five letters of support.
We're going through the zoning maps. We'll come back to this. This is the historic zoning map,
zoning archive, coming back to this as well. Photographs. This is the aerial photograph.
Photographs of property. There's my postings on the front and rear. Again, front on Frankfurt,
rear on Martha and our plans, and we will come back to all of this. So let me go here. And so
2468 Frankfurt is a CMX2, is currently zone CMX2, and it runs street to street from Frankfurt Ave
back to Martha, which is a small street here that's largely the rears of homes on Ember
and the rear of some properties on Frankfurt and a lot of vacant properties as well.
Currently, this property, so as you can see, there's two main structures on this property
with a yard that separates them right here. This front structure is currently three residential
units. And that was given a use permit in 1960 for the three one -bedroom units in that main
property. And we're not proposing any change to that. What we're looking at here is just this
rear building that faces Martha. So let me just go to the picture so you can see a little bit more
what we're talking about. So this is the front on Frankfurt. This is the rear on Martha.
And they are separate structures. This is the little yard that's in between the two.
So our proposal is to take this structure that was a former carriage house for the property.
As you can see, it's old. It has been around a long time. Take this, preserve it, improve the
facade and basically, in general, renovate this to be used as an additional bi -level
one -bedroom residential unit.
So if we go to the plans, you can see here again, this is the Frankfurt Ave structure,
the open space, and then this two -story former carriage house.
And pretty basic structure, going to have a living and kitchen space on the first floor,
one bedroom, one bathroom on the second floor.
This did generate two refusals, the first of which I have no objection to, and that is for the minimum lot area required for four residential units in a CMX2 zoning.
By the code, you're required to have a little 1 ,920 square feet, and our existing parcel is 1 ,613 square feet.
Like I said, we have a permit from, excuse me, a permit from 1960 that created this three residential units plus the garage in the rear.
And when my client purchased this property in 2005 and up to about 2017, this property was owned RM1.
this property was zoned RM1. So here you can see here, this is the prior zoning map.
Um, so here you can.
This is the area we're talking about here. This is Martha. This is Frankfurt. And so the property
is one of these right here. And in, when he bought this house and this property in 2005,
it was always, he was living there until 2016. And it was always his intention to convert this
carriage house and restore it into a residential unit. Prior to the remapping in 2017, this would
have been a buy -write project and we wouldn't have been here. In RM1, for four units, you only need
1 ,440 square feet of parcel for the four unit, and we have over 1 ,600 square feet. As you know,
Now in CMX2, the zoning code is anticipating that in addition to whatever residential units, there would also be a commercial unit.
So in the 1920 square feet that's required, you would actually have five units, a commercial unit and four residential units, right?
Right. So and if you only wanted to have four total units, a commercial and three residential, you would you would be back to, excuse me, 1440 square feet of parcel required for those four units.
So because we have a long -standing use here, and then this is the new zoning map, as you can see,
it is CMX2 now. So here we have a proposal where we have four total units without a commercial
space, which we're going to get to next. But that lack of commercial space has been there since the
1960s. So we would like to continue to use this as a purely residential building, restore and
renovate the existing older carriage house in the back and have four total units, as would be allowed
by the zoning code in CMX2, just without one commercial space. So it's not really,
we don't think that this is an overuse of the property at all, since we would be allowed to
have actually a more intensive use of three residential units and a commercial space on
this property by right um all right so that gets us to um the second refusal which is for the lack
of commercial space um let's just go to the refusal um it's specifically for a lack of
commercial space along martha as we already have had a zoning uh zoning in place for no commercial
on Frankfurt since 1960. And the reason I'm objecting to this is because
the code only requires commercial space on the ground floor of the primary frontage of the
property. And very clearly here, the primary frontage of the property is on Frankfurt Avenue,
not on Martha. And we received refusal for lack of commercial space on Martha. However,
I'm still going to give our case why it's not a good idea to have a commercial space on Martha.
So if we go to the photos here again,
we have the ground floor commercial space just would not be very appropriate here.
First of all, just based on size, this entire structure when you have two floors is only about
700 square feet. So you'd be creating a commercial space on the first floor that's quite small,
which is going to be at most around 350 square feet, perhaps good for, I don't know, a small
office, but it would be very hard to, it's not really a good commercial space, right? And if you
look at Martha Street in general, you can see that this is not a commercial street. This is a
residential block, which is confirmed when you go back to the zoning map. And you can see here
that fronting Martha, you have RSA 5 homes, RSA 5. And then, you know, these are the rear of
the commercial properties. But in general, when you're looking at just Martha, you have a residential
single family home single family block and what's cool about our project right is that you're going
to have this separate building which looks like a single family home and will function as a single
family home on a block that's zoned for single family use uh it's just that because it's one
property uh it's going to be multi -family all when you put them all together but essentially
you're going to wind up with a single unit and a single family home. And so it's going to fit
right in with the neighborhood. I also think that this is a really much better use to have someone
I also think that this is a really much better use to have someone living here. As you can see on Martha, we have a lot of vacant space, we have a lot of garages, we have a lot of rears of home, and not a lot of eyes on the street and people going in and out of it.
it is a block when we talk to the neighborhood. And also from my personal experience, and you
can see a little in this photo, we have problems with trash and dumping and things like that.
And the more people we can have interacting with the street, the better to help keep it clean and
tidy and prevent any sort of misdeeds going on on that block. So we think that this, between that,
between getting eyes on the street and essentially having a single family home facing a single
family block and preserving a fairly old historic structure. We think this is in harmony with the
neighborhood and the comprehensive plan. We did meet with ECNA and Fishtown BID and I will get
to their letters. So I did send out all the notices and it was posted. We had two people come. They
were both in support. I just wanted to say also that the contractor, who is also the proposed
tenant uh for this project um did do further outreach to the community both before we started
the zoning appeal process and during um and and talked to the neighbors extensively i think no
one came because they were all okay with it based on what he told me but again that's just what i
was told take it for what it is uh we also meet with the fishtown bid i just want to highlight uh
this section of their letter which said in the current matter the part of the property that
faces our district, Frankfurt Ave, has already been legalized for multifamily use. The rear
garage facing Martha does not have any commercial frontage on the street and is most suitable for
residential use. The Fish Town area bid believes that this is the best use of the detached structure
and will add to our growing residential density, which will in turn continue to help the thriving
business corridor. And we tend to agree with that assessment. Let me just get to the neighbor's
letters of support. So I can show you, this is the adjacent property owner at 2470 Frankfurt.
No, you know, they're in support. 2465 Amber and 2461 Amber are the properties to the rear
that their backyards face Martha to the rear of the property. And they are also in support. We
have another one on Amber 2457. Again, their property backs up to Martha. And this is another
property owner further down on Frankfurt, who's in support. I did also just want to point out that
my client has owned this property since 2005, which is 18 years at this point. I can't believe
2005 is 18 years ago, but it is. And there have been no violations on the property. So you know
that he has been taking care of it and it is being well maintained. I know trash is always
an issue when we talk about multifamily housing. Trash will be stored in that rear yard area and
taken out on trash day like it would in basically in a single family home where trash is stored in
the backyard and taken out. And then what I did want to highlight here is that this exact proposal
was previously approved in 2018. I was also the attorney at this point. And at that point,
it was also supported by ECHNA unanimously, 23 to zero at the meeting. What happened is my client
owns this property. He's not a major investor, started the project. We got the proposal and he
was unable to finish it within the three years. So we're back here looking to renew this variance.
He has contractors lined up, financing lined up, all that ready to go. So this project will be
completed. In summary, I think that this is a great project because you have a property that
an old structure that we're looking to preserve and use in a way that makes sense on the block
as was multifamily use. It's essentially a single family home on a single family block.
Could you have your client and have them adopt your testimony, please?
Sure. Daniel, are you here? Can you raise your hand?
chair i am unmuting daniel welsh hi sir could you state your name and spell it please for the
court stenographer hi my name is daniel welsh my last name is spelled w -e -l -s -h do you swear or
affirm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth i do proceed counsel uh daniel have
you heard my testimony here today and believe it to be truthful and accurate i do yes and would
adopt it as your own i would yes thank you thank you questions from the board
no mr chairman no chair questions or comments from the virtual audience
no chair questions or comments from the virtual audience
chair i see no hands at this time my planning commission thank you chair and good morning
david effecto with the city planning commission the comprehensive plan recommends no change to
commercial mixed use zoning at this location the proposed variance from the required commercial
space documents and existing condition however the fourth dwelling unit could be achieved if
the appellant applied for the mixed income housing bonus, which would remove this variance
and provide a guaranteed affordable unit. And the appellant has not shown that the economic
detriment would accrue to the property if a fourth unit were not allowed to be added.
So the city planning commission recommends that the board grant the proposed use variance from
the commercial ground floor requirement, but deny the dimensional variance for a fourth dwelling
unit. May I just respond for one second? I do think that right now we have a vacant structure
that without a fourth unit is pretty much unusable. MI 2023 -000 -820 -2468 Frankfurt Avenue,
I vote yes. Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes. Ishmael Shahid, my vote is yes.
Thank you, counsel. Thank you so much. Number five, MI 2023 -000 -988 -4203 Adams Avenue. Henry Clinton is the attorney. Letter of support from Frankfort Neighborhood Advisory Committee with proviso.
Mr. Chair, this is Hillary. I also want to note that we received a letter of non -opposition from
Council Member Lozada. Thank you.
Morning, Mr. Clinton. Could you state your name, please, and spell for the court stenographer?
Sure. Mr. Chairman, it's Henry Clinton, A -T -N -R -Y, Clinton, C -L -I -N -T -O -N.
Right. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Could you identify your client in relationship to this property?
Sure. I have two clients, Mark Romanoff, R -O -M -A -N -I -W, and his uncle, Michael Milos, M -I -L -O -S. Mark is on the call today.
Right. Our vice chair has just a few questions, sir.
Good morning, counsel. Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Have you emailed in all the required documents and exhibits that are needed to proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing?
Yes, I have.
Thank you. Please proceed and share your screen.
Is that visible, Mr. Chairman?
It is, sir.
All right. Good morning, Mr. Chairman, members of the board.
again, Henry Clinton on behalf of Mark Romanoff and Michael Milos. This property concerns
a lot in a building that they have owned since 2001. And they've also owned the adjoining
properties to this structure since 2001. And actually, my client, Mark, grew up on the block
and his mother still resides on the block. What we're seeking is a legalization of a storage
building. And I'll walk through the presentation and show the board why it merits consideration.
The refusal, there's five refusals. Some of them relate to the fact that the property is in a
special flood hazard zone. We're within striking distance of the Frankfurt Creek, but I have all
the necessary flood certifications and various requirements to conform to the request here in this
refusal. We provided the necessary documentation of flood certification form, FPVAR, at the end
of this presentation. The other refusals relate to the fact that our request for a storage
building to store building materials and equipment is in an RSA 5 zoning district.
But you'll see from the aerial photographs that the entire area, save for a few homes,
are industrial use directly across the street, as well as my clients adjacent storage yards.
So it's been a nonconforming use since at least 2001, as far as we can understand.
The other refusals deal with dimensional issues, the height of the fence, the setback of the property. It's a six -inch minimal dimensional issue right there.
dimensional issue right there. The dimensional standard for lower density in residential
districts, there's a requirement for side yard. You'll see that this lot, about 16 feet wide in
the building encompasses the entire width of the building and is adjacent to a building that's
owned by a relative of my client. We do have a letter of support from Frankfort Neighborhood
Advisory Committee. We met with them in July of 2023. So here's some photographs for the board
for perspective. So the building at issue is right here. I'll give you a closer view, but
the backstory is in 2009, since there are no other buildings on the two adjacent lots that
my clients own, they needed some type of a storage building. And you'll see there was no windows,
really one door in the back. And it was just to keep some of their hand tools and portable
equipment out of the elements. The two buildings that I'm showing you with my cursor to the rear
of the property are not my client's buildings. They belong to someone who fronts on the opposite
street. So basically, my clients have been operating a cement business in this yard since
around 2001, on and off, depending on weather conditions and the economy. Adjacent to my
client's building is a building that's owned by my client's relative. And then toward the left,
you can see there's a number of residential structures. My client, Mark, grew up in the
structure about four houses away. His mom still lives there. Across the street, you can see it's
industrial use. It's all zoned I -2. Next photograph is an aerial photograph. I'll give you this
photograph, Mr. Chairman, because where my cursor is, is for Creek. My client has indicated it is
not ever overflowed or flooded the area since he was a resident of the blocks since the 1980s,
including in 1986, when the devastating Hurricane Gloria wreaked havoc on our area.
Again, an aerial view, my client's building is adjacent to this larger garage to the north.
A closer view, so the bottom block building was constructed in 2009.
Again, it contained no windows.
All it was was just an area to keep things out of sight for security purposes and away from the elements.
The top structure, my client started to build in 2019.
Whether he knew or didn't know that he had a permit in 2009 for the block building,
nevertheless, he went ahead and started building the upper structure in 2019.
When he became aware that he did not have permits, he stopped construction.
That's why you see the building the way it is.
You can see in the left -hand window some of the windows that he does intend to install
if we are successful with this appeal,
but this is not a reflection
of what the building will look like.
It's simply, he stopped construction
pending getting a hearing before this board.
Adjacent is the entrance to the yard,
where again, there's a lot of materials
that are stored for their company.
To the left, some two -story residential properties.
This is the rear of the structure.
Again, there's a heater, there's some hand tools.
Again, it was just something to keep his equipment
out of the elements and out of the eyesight of anyone who would be interested in perhaps taking
this equipment. Side views, some interior views again. There's no utilities to this building,
Mr. Chairman. It's not meant to be residential in nature. The only access is going to be from
the outside, frankly, not from the inside. And you can see the windows that are there for
hopefully eventual use. Our zoning poster
notices. And
this is the plan, the site plan.
So this is the lot.
I said 16. It's about 18 wide, 100 feet deep. And you can see it's owned
by Milos and my client, Mark. And they also own
the adjacent parcel, as well as the third parcel. And all three parcels, they're not
consolidated, but they've been used continuously since 2002 for their business purposes. And you
can see these lines on the property. These are flood lines, and I'll show you a better picture
of that as I continue to move through the presentation. Side elevation, again, the existing
structure from 2009 and the proposed, which was started in 2019, application for
and the proposed which was started in 2019 application for appeal
tax clearance zoning map so is this visible chairman i make it need to make it larger
that's fine okay so the purple is i2 for whatever reason despite my client's use or my client's
floral use of the three properties for industrial use
from 2001, it's still zoned RSA 5.
The cross hatching is the flood area, the flood zone.
And you can see the front part where the structure is built
is definitely in the flood zone,
which required us to hire an engineer
and to provide a flood certification.
And I have those documents at the end of the presentation.
This is the deed indicating ownership
since March of 2001 by both clients.
This is our notice letter.
And these are our flood protection form variances,
a flood certification, as well as flood protection form.
As I said, we had to hire an engineer, James Henry,
who provided all the necessary documentation to L &I.
We had to submit these documents to L &I
before they would allow us to proceed with this appeal.
So I don't know if the chairman wants me to address these,
but basically it's a unique site -specific
individual circumstance where a two -story structure
in an existing construction company storage
and materials yard has been constructed
solely to store materials.
Again, no utilities, no, and this was one of the questions
that the community group had.
They were concerned that this was going to be used
somehow for residential purposes
And it absolutely has not since 2009 and will not in the future if this appeal is granted.
So in conclusion, I'd like to suggest that this is a unique circumstance that we have here.
Yes, the building is situated in an RSA 5 zoning district.
And it's been used, however, for commercial slash industrial use for over 20 years.
the building really is necessary because there are no other buildings on the on the sites
to store materials as I said equipment hand tools keep them out of sight from anyone walking by
we have our FPVAR form attached we're not imposing upon the development rights of any
adjacent neighbor we're not affecting light and air in fact the adjacent building as I said is
owned by a relative of Mark. So I think we're in harmony with the uses in the area, despite that
there's residential to the left side of the screen. There's heavy industrial across the street,
heavy in the sense that it's a large lot and it's used on a regular basis. So with that, I'm asking
the board to look kindly upon this application. And my client certainly is available to adopt my
testimony. Sure. Absolutely. Mark, can you unmute yourself and or raise your hand?
Mark Rabideau has been unmuted. Hi, sir. Could you state your name,
please, and spell for the court stenographer?
Mark Rabideau, please unmute yourself and wait for the chair.
Mark, yeah, they hit star six. There you go.
Mark, can you hear me?
How are you?
Hi, could you state your name, please, and spell for the courts that are?
Sure. It's Mark Anthony Romano, R -O -M -A -N -I -W.
Right. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Proceed, counsel.
Mr. Romano, you were on the Zoom call when I presented your project to the board.
That is correct.
And if you had an opportunity to testify, would you adopt my testimony as your own and as true and correct?
Correct.
Thank you.
Questions from the board?
No, Mr. Chairman.
No, Chair.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
chair we have goats got see peeve okay got see please please unmute yourself and wait for the
chair i could you state your name please and spell for the court stenographer uh sure thing
my first name is gochi g -o -t -c -e last name is peeve p -e -e -v do you swear or affirm tell the
truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth i do are you a neighbor uh i am a local investor
I am a local investor. I own a number of properties.
i own a number of properties okay proceed then
Okay, proceed then, sir.
So what I can tell you about Mark, he's an excellent steward of the neighborhood.
I've basically seen him operate his business for a number of years through that lot.
He's always kept and maintained that property.
His mom lives up the street.
They've been there for decades at this point, I would say.
and you know without mark in that area that area essentially falls apart uh i can tell you that
firsthand by whenever mark goes on vacation you essentially know it you know trash accumulates
in areas he doesn't uh you know he's not there to take care of it and you know he's basically a
beacon for the air for the whole area um you know without mark a lot of those folks would be lost
there i can tell you that firsthand mr peeve thank you for taking the time to call in we appreciate
your comments. Is there anyone else in the virtual audience? Chair, I've seen all the hands at this
time. Hi, Planning Commission. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and good morning, David Fecta with the
City Planning Commission. The comprehensive plan recommends no change to the residential single
family zoning at this location. The proposed use and dimensional variances appear to document
conditions built without the benefit of permits. The proper remedy for a proposal that varies this
much from the underlying zoning as a zoning change not a zoning variance the city planning
commission recommends the board deny the use of dimensional variances for this proposal
uh council did you see the proviso yes about the fence yeah yeah sure you would agree with that
yes we agree with that and if i could just address the planning commission's comments
Sure. I understand that Mr. Fecto's point that a zoning change may be necessary, but in the end, it's still the same effect. If a zoning change was effectuated, we'd still have the same circumstance. So I think a nonconforming use for over 20 years merits some consideration.
Okay. MI 2023 -000 -988 -4203 Adams Avenue. I vote yes with proviso. Fence limited to six feet in height.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes with proviso.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes with proviso.
Thank you, counsel.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Have a great day.
Number 10, MI -2023 -000892 -2250 Kennedy Street.
Alan Nockmson is the attorney.
Letter of opposition from the Bridesburg Community Action Alliance.
Applicant also submitted a petition with 19 neighbors.
Mr. Chair, this is Hillary.
I just want to note, we also just received a supplemental letter from Bradford Community Action Alliance further explaining their opposition in this matter.
Okay, thank you.
Mr. Nockamson, could you state your name, please, and spell it for the court stenographer?
Yes, Alan Nockamson, A -L -A -N, last name Nockamson, N -O -C -H -U -M -S -O -N.
I do swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Could you identify your client relationship to this property?
Yes, my client is Case Abdel Cater. He is the owner of the property.
Our vice chair has just a few questions.
Good morning, counsel. Do you agree to wait the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Have you emailed in all the required documents and exhibits that are needed to proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing?
Yes, we have.
thank you thank you for seeing the finish question oh yes uh Mr. Chair um I would ask
Ms. Emerson if she can to email me the supplemental letter so absolutely and then I'll just take them
after my presentation I'll take a minute just to review it and see if I can respond in kind
okay sure thank you Hillary doing it right now Mr. Chair okay thank you thank you
Hi, so I'm here to present 2250 Kennedy Street. This is a two -story structure in the Bridesburgs
section of Philadelphia. What we're looking to do is allow for visitor accommodation use.
We're not creating any dimensional refusals here. My client has done significant work on the inside
of the property in detrimental reliance on being able to allow this type of use unfortunately he
was a little ignorant of the fact that he needed special governmental approval for visitor accommodation
The fact that he needed special governmental approval for visitor accommodation use, but all the renovation work that he did, the significant amount of money he spent was to create a visitor accommodation use.
use, but although
So we'll review the notice of refusal. We have the correspondence that we did receive from the Bridesburg Community Action Alliance.
Obviously, then we'll comment at the conclusion of my presentation on this supplemental letter.
my client made a concerted effort after retaining us which we were not retained for epic up until
basically last week he he did not make any outreach to the community we asked him you know
it sounded like from the letter that you know that the community members were in opposition to this
project we you know he he then canvassed the neighborhood and was able to get a petition of
almost the same amount of people who were allegedly against the project at the community
meeting. In particular, I don't know how close the members of the community were at the community
meeting, but the people that he sought are within the affected area, many of which are on this block
in particular. So the people who are most detrimentally impacted or just impacted at all
are ones who are now in support of this project. So I can't speak as to who attended that community
meeting. I wasn't there either. In addition to the petition, he'll says letters to support. I don't
know if they're duplicative, but we do have a map that we created of the individuals who signed
whether the petition or letters to support. We have the Airbnb listing. Again, he's only had
one listing so far, but if you read the listing itself and the commentary, he's kept it up really
well. It's a really nice property, and we have interior photographs to show that as well.
Then we have maps of the area. This is an RSA 5 property, and because of that, we're required
under the current rules and regulations to seek this special governmental approval.
But again, we're not increasing the density of the property.
It's just a legal technicality.
When you're renting to an individual for less than 30 days rather than more than 30 days,
you're required to get this governmental approval.
But the actual use itself is no more detrimental to the community.
In actuality, having short -term visitor accommodation use is in a lot of ways better for the community because usually what happens is that people are visiting from out of town.
They may have members, family members that live in Bridesburg that they just need additional accommodations.
So a lot of times you don't have the parking situation that you would expect for long -term accommodations where people need parking.
Regardless, we're near I -95, which is helpful for people who are using cars.
And then my client actually took a picture recently to show that there is no issue with the parking situation regardless.
But either way, the use is single -family use.
We're not renting by the room.
We're just renting one single -family home for single -family use, and they're using it for less than 30 days.
Then we'll show you photographs of the exterior of the property as well as the interior of the
property. Our simple floor plans, again, we haven't changed the exterior in any way. We haven't
expanded it or deleted it, but we've done significant renovations inside the property.
Again, in detrimental reliance, again, ignorantly, I would concede, unfortunately,
that my client did not know that there are different rules and regulations regarding
short -term use versus long -term use. This would be financially devastating if my client couldn't
use it this way. He purchased the property based on being allowed to use it for short -term use.
He made significant renovations based on short -term use. We would ask that the board grants,
if they granted a variance, to have a temporary variance. I know that the board's more inclined
to do three to five years. I understand the community opposition. I would ask for a shorter
variance period to show his true worth to the board not a year because it almost takes a year
nowadays to get in front of this board from the beginning of the process but like even just two
years and after these two years if there's an issue trust me the board will know from the
community and they'll have a more informed decision than just conceptually we're against this
they're just against it because they're against it in a lot of ways so we would ask for a two -year
temporary variance to show my client that he'll be doing the right thing. Then we have the RCO
meeting notice. Again, we didn't submit that. So all we did was provide the notice, proof of
mailing, certificate of mailing, our application for appeal, our deed to the property. Again,
my client is not like this is, he purchased it in his own name. Just shows, again, he's
you know not you know i i don't want to talk badly he's not not he's not sophisticated but
this is his first venture in something like this and um he put his life savings into this and it
would be really devastating uh the certificate of tax clearance as well he's you know he's a
uh the certificate of tax clearance as well he's you know he's a good standing with the city with
good standing with the city which regards his property
regards to his property so our notice of refusal very simple visitor accommodations um you know he
i know the city's cracking down we received an email from the city this past month that they're
going to crack down but he didn't know like he honestly didn't know that these regulations have
been on the books for some time um but you know it he would he was ill -informed or not not informed
about this and trust me he would not have bought it and done the work that he did do if he did know
about it and then the correspondence uh from the group so again it was a straight vote not much
commentary um you know other than they're strongly against air bbs in the neighborhood again i you
Whether it's Airbnb or not, it's the same type of use.
And in a lot of the ways, again, someone who does Airbnb is more involved as a quote -unquote landlord when you're renting a room or, excuse me, a home.
Even on a daily basis, you've got to go by that place every single day.
You have to clean it up.
You've got to dispose of trash.
So in some ways, short -term accommodations for the neighborhood is better than long -term accommodations.
We talked about the parking situation too.
So I would like to, I'll take a look at that letter and comment about any other comments they may have.
And then again, we had our client canvassed the neighborhood.
There were 15 addresses other than ours in support of this project.
And if you look, my client, and this is, I guess, I don't know what this is, but like really the focus was these, like this one area.
and there's some here outliers, but like the people on this block are not against it. His
neighbors are not against it. So again, I don't know who attended the community meeting, if there's
a representative here, but we really do try to have our clients focus on the people who would
be most impacted. And then here are the signatures along with their addresses and contact information,
you know, so people can verify that. And then the letters as well, people who tend to sign the
letters tend to give email addresses more than phone numbers. But a lot of addresses on Kennedy
Street on our 100 block. And then the Airbnb listing. Again, you'll see from the photographs
that we took off Airbnb, but this is their listing. He really put a lot of heart and effort
into this and it'd just be a shame you know he did furnish it such that you know he would lose the
you know the the um the value of of all of his furnishings um one can say he can do long -term
accommodations but the amount of money he purchased the property for and the amount of
renovate the cost of the renovations he would never be able to make that up and again he's
hoping that this board would, you know, would hopefully agree to give him at least a two -year
temporary appearance. And then maps of the area, we're not discounting the fact this is an RSA 5
block, although there's ICMX above us, but we're not changing the character of the block. This is
still going to be single -family use. And as you can see, we're right off of 95. Again, we're close
to, I believe, some of that ICMX has to do with, you know, you have a self -storage facility and
you have a lot of commercial as well nearby. And then this is the exterior of the property.
And then, candidate to the right of the property. And as you can see, the parking situation is not
horrible here. So, even if someone's going to use a car, whether it's single -family,
whether it's long -term or short -term, there is adequate parking around here.
Kennedy to the left of the property and then I wanted to take a I had my client take a more
recent photo just to make sure that we're you know that what we're saying is correct
and you can see the parking situation is actually pretty good on Kennedy Street
and then this is the posting for of today's hearing and then these are the interior photos
that you would see on Airbnb but he made significant renovations if you look up
the L &I website or the Atlas, you would see that he did everything the right way by getting
permits and things like that. And then our plans and drawings, again, nothing changed,
but it's an open floor plan on the first floor, living room, dining room, kitchen, half bath,
you go up and down, excuse me, go up a flight of steps, there are three bedrooms and one bath.
no roof deck. There is a patio area in the back. This is the notice that he sent to the community.
patio area in the back. This is the notice that he sent to the community. Proof of mailing of that
notice. Our application for appeal along with the notice of refusal and project information form
due to property. As you can see, he purchased it in his own name. So he's taking full ownership
of this. He's not hiding behind an LLC. And then our certificate of tax clearance. With that being
said, I would ask that Case virtually raise his hand. He can be sworn in, adopt my testimony
as his own, and then I just would like just one minute to just review that letter.
And, sir, could you state your name, please, and spell for the court stenographer?
Case, Ben, can you please unmute yourself?
Good morning.
Chair, he's not unmuting. I do see his hand, and I have unmuted him, but he's not unmuting on his end.
Case Ben, please unmute yourself.
Okay. Counsel, you're an officer of the court. We'll gladly take your testimony.
All right. Great.
Do you want to read the letter?
Why don't I go through the rest of it and I'll give you the final say with the letter, okay?
Sure, thank you, Mr. Chair.
Questions from the board?
No, Mr. Chairman.
No, Chair.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
Chair, we have the same name with the hand of Case Ben.
It's here a second time.
Do you want me to unmute that person?
Sure, please.
Case Ben, please unmute yourself and wait for the chair.
all right could you state your name please and spell for the
yes could you state your name and spell for the court stenographer
yes sir kais ben abdel kader k -a -i -s ben b -e -n -a -b -d -e -l -k -a -d -e -r
all right do you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth
i do proceed counsel
Oh, yes. Case, you heard everything I had to state today about your zoning matter.
Is it true and correct what I stated?
And do you adopt it as your own testament?
Thank you.
Is there anyone else in the virtual audience for comment?
Chair, I see no hands at this time.
Planning Commission.
Thank you, Chair, and good morning.
David Effecto with the City Planning Commission.
The comprehensive plan recommends no change to the residential single -family zoning at
this location.
There is no unique physical condition or circumstance of this property that would prevent it from
being used in conformance with the zoning code.
The City Planning Commission recommends that the board deny the proposed use variance for
visitor accommodations.
Thank you.
Mr. Nockamson?
Yeah, so I read the letter.
So I think, again, we do a lot of these variances, even for short -term accommodations.
And what I hear over and over again is there's so many short -term accommodations throughout the city. And I think what is lost in that is that, especially when you're dealing with communities like Bridesburg or different parts of Philadelphia that are not center city or not center city oriented, like nearby, these communities need this additional short -term accommodations for families that live within these neighborhoods.
So especially if you look at this block, the stock of housing is small.
If you have family coming over, you have nowhere to go other than going to Center City, which is expensive and inconvenient.
So I think that you're not going to have a ton of people who are going to rent short -term accommodations who are just randomly going to rent short -term accommodations.
It's for people who are going to be living in Bridesburg for the benefit of their family members.
And I think that's a market that I think it's actually family -oriented, which goes to their letter, like we're close in a family -oriented neighborhood and we want long -term accommodations.
Well, I think this is going to help supplement, you know, and help out those members in that community who have people who visit there.
So I think for that reason, it's a more unique circumstance.
We're in Bridesburg and we're not center city and we're not trying to do it just for the sake of doing it.
So we would ask that the board grant it with a temporary variance of two years.
And by 2023, 000 -892 -2250 Kennedy Street, I vote yes with proviso.
This is a temporary variance, expires 8 -3 -25.
Thomas Holliman, my vote is yes with proviso.
Thomas Holliman, my vote is yes with proviso.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes with proviso.
Thank you, counsel.
Thank you very much.
See you later this afternoon.
Right.
Number 12, MI 2023, 000947, 1224 Pennock Street.
Vern Anastasio is the attorney.
letter of support from brewery town shardswood community civic association
mr chair this is hillary um we received a late request for continuance um from a neighbor
ashley rivera um based on how the property was posted so i just want to address um that issue
first for the record and the board can decide whether or not to proceed so it does appear that
miss Rivera is here okay so um she can raise her hand let me let me swear counseling first
could you state your name please and spell for the court stenographer yes Mr. Chair Verne
Anastasio A -N -A -S -T -A -S -I -O 2016 Spruce Philadelphia 19103 and I represent Mr. George
ship. Right. Do you swear or firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
I do. And what's the name of the person who sent the letter?
Ashley Rivera is already unmuted. She just has to unmute herself.
Hi. Hi. Could you state your name and spell, please, for the court stenographer?
Good morning. My name is Ashley Rivera, R -I -V as in Victor, E -R -A.
Right. Do you swear or firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, sir, I do.
Could you state your reason why this should be continued?
Yes. So the properties at issue are 1224 and 1226 Pennock Street. The applicant has a sign
regarding this hearing posted on the West Stiles Street side of 1226 Pennock Street,
but there is no sign whatsoever posted on Pennock Street itself. And it is true that there was an
RCO meeting and neighbors did attend that. But at that meeting, there was also an adjacent property
and nearby like within viewing distance project that was also considered and the applicant for
that project did comply with all of the required notice requirements. So whether or not, you know,
participated in the meeting for the applicant, the current applicant's project or the neighboring
project is unclear. So I'm just requesting a continuance such that the applicant can post
the sign on Pennock Street, which is required under the Philadelphia City Code.
Mr. Chair, I have to object. My client posted in good faith. The large portion of the lot is on
the street in which it was posted wasn't hidden in plain sight. It was posted very high. Not only
was it posted with the poster, but also the refusal. In addition, 163 immediate households
were mailed notice of this hearing. In addition, 30 immediate neighbors showed up at the RCO meeting.
I think it's whether both sides of the property were posted or one of the larger side. I think
it's a distinction without a difference in this particular matter. There's absolutely no one in
that immediate area that wasn't made aware of not only the community meeting, but of the details of
the hearing today. So I'm going to go on with the hearing. A portion of the hearing will be going to
the audience, the virtual audience. Ms. Rivera, you can really testify then and respond, okay?
understood thank you all right mr anastasio could you identify your client to in a relationship to
the property one more time yep i represent the owner mr george shipp okay and our vice chair
has just a few questions great great good morning counsel do you agree to wave the reading of the
refusal and stipulate to its accuracy i do i do have you emailed in all the required documents
and exhibits that are needed and required to proceed with this case five days in advance
of this hearing? I have. Thank you. Please proceed and see your screen.
1224 Pennock Street. The application is for the relocation of lot lines. Two very small lots to make.
application is for the relocation of lot lines two very small lots to make one lot for a single
family residential home with a garage and this is the property this is the rendering of what
will be Mr. Shipp's home as you can see it's in complete compliance with the
the height requirements, the use is consistent. We do have two minor refusals, and I'll explain
to you what they are. We are offering off -street parking, and of course the parking is not
permitted unless it's on a rear access. The way the property is situated, obviously there can't
be a rear parking, but we do have it on the side as I showed you here in the rendering.
And it avoids a front loading garage situation, which is what the spirit of the code was designed
to do to avoid that. The other minor dimensional variance is for rear yard.
We are proposing a five foot rear yard and what is required is seven feet, but yes, it is only five
feet deep but it's 22 feet long so uh it's plenty of of open air space and of course it meets
that requirement with 124 square feet of open air space um and because this these two lots are so
narrow uh they we actually need the two additional uh feet in order to make the interior uh livable
but this permits uh ample outdoor space uh deep enough to also make sure that the trash is stored
correctly but in fact have additional outdoor space uh for outdoor seating and and uh passive
recreation. Here's a photo of the lot. It was overwhelmingly supported by just about everybody
in attendance. Some folks were sad that they would be losing their illegal parking. Other folks,
just like the idea of a vacant lot, we did ensure that when trees are removed, we're going to do
what we can to replace those trees on sidewalk and there is an adjacent construction project
that's going on uh shortly and uh both uh that council and myself agreed to coordinate uh the
construction uh time frame here's proof of mailing to 163 individual households this was the two
page notice that went out to all individuals and we do have a letter of support i believe it's on
file from the juniana uh civic association return right say it again what's brewery town am i right
i'm sorry brewery town sharswood sure okay that's my that's my other case today well that's good
here's the garage it's a double wide even though this has shows two cars here the application was
for a one car but he does want the extra wide garage for storage on one half as you can see
that above the garage there'll be a kitchen living room dining area
and then we've got uh three modest size bedrooms and then a master suite at the top
again all within compliance of the height requirements and with that i'd like to call
mr ship to raise his virtual hand i believe he is in the audience by the way this is the
The posting, as you can see, pretty hard to miss.
Good morning, Mr. Schiff.
Could you state your name and spell, please, for the court stenographer?
Chair, I see no hands at this time.
He may have been on, but perhaps he did not stick around.
You're an officer of the court.
We will accept your testimony.
Thank you.
I have no things further.
Questions from the board?
No, Chair.
No, Mr. Chairman.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
Chair, we have Ashley Rivera, please unmute.
Chair, we have Ashley Rivera. Please unmute. Wait for the chair.
Good morning. You've already been sworn. Could you just state your name again for the record?
Good morning. My name is Ashley Rivera.
Okay. Are you a neighbor?
I am, yes.
Proceed.
So I'd just like to address a couple of points made by Office of Counsel.
First, he specifically noted that the sign that he posted, sorry, that is posted is posted high as required, you know, as he alleges it's required.
The Philadelphia Code actually requires that the sign be posted at eye level.
So by his own admission, it is posted higher than that.
It is obstructed by the, as he noted, illegally parked cars.
And as you can see in the photo that he provided, it is not actually easily easy to view for anyone who's passing through, but not otherwise would have any reason to poke around in between people's vehicles to see if perhaps development might be going on on that property.
The other thing that I would like to mention is that the board is required under the city code to delay action unless required posting began as required and made a good faith effort to keep the sign notices posted.
Applicant's counsel does not even contend that it posted those signs.
As I mentioned, this is a Penrock Street address, and there is no sign whatsoever on Penrock Street.
The one sign that was posted is not actually easy to view, and it is not on the side of the property that is actually the subject of the appeal.
So, like I said, I am not interested in trying to, you know, cause any big problems here. I'm just requesting a continuance, a delay such that the applicant can come into compliance, because as we've seen so far today, a number of other applicants have had no problem complying with the requirement that signage be posted on all frontages of their property.
why this particular applicant failed to make any effort to post any sign at all on the one side of
the property that is not obstructed by vehicles. It's not entirely clear to me, but I don't think
that it is that the city code permits the board to act on this variance when the required signage
required by law. No, you know, hey, good faith, you sent something in the mail. Hey, you posted
one sign, the law is two signs must be posted on each frontage. And in this instance, there is not
even a sign posted on literally the named street for this property. So I don't think that it is
appropriate for the board to grant the variance at this time. I'd also like to mention that
applicant's counsel indicated on page nine of his submission that that was an image of the
subject property. It is not. That is a completely different property, which actually has been built
on since then. And if you look at that page, you will see that actually the subject property is in
the background on the right -hand side of that image. So it's just not even correct that that
image actually reflects what applicant council says that it does. Mr. Chair, you'll have your
chance. Thank you. Mr. Rivera, I hear your issues with the sign. Are you against the project?
I am not inherently. I think that there's been, there have been some issues with
the proposed development that applicants counsel said would be addressed, which I've not heard
anything to indicate they have. For example, changing the frontage of the home from Pennock
Street to Stile Street. In the renderings he provided, the front of the home is actually on
the side, not on Pennock Street. It's on West Stile Street. Another home on the street has done
something similar and did not go through the whatever process is required to have the frontage
changed and that has become a hassle for me because people go looking for an address that
doesn't where there's no door it doesn't exist the same kind of problem is likely to to occur
in this situation if the building is not oriented in the way that that you know the city has it
oriented. I'm also concerned that the garage renderings, those will impede potentially my
front garage. So I have a number of concerns that counsel has not, as far as I can tell,
made any effort to address. And they quite simply, as I said, have not complied with the law. And
I'm concerned that if they are disregarding the code's requirements at this stage of the proceedings,
disregarding the code's requirement at this stage of the proceedings,
I'm not
I'm not real confident that they will, you know, honor it as the project progresses.
Ms. Rivera, did you attend the RCO meeting?
Yes, sir, I did.
Did you raise the issues there?
Yes, I did.
Okay. All right. Thank you very much. We appreciate it.
I have a cross, Ms. Rivera.
Sure, sure.
Ms. Rivera, please put your address on the record, please.
My address is 1215 -1215, North Pannock Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, 19121.
Okay, and you state that, you allege that the posting wasn't placed on Pannock Street, is that correct?
Yep, that's right.
Okay, and that somehow would disadvantage people on Pannock Street?
Is that correct?
Anyone passing through the.
okay yeah it would disadvantage anyone how would how did you community how did you learn about the
today's hearing then um actually the adjacent prop the nearby property that we were talking
about they do have their signs properly posted on how did you learn about today's i'm responding
to your question right so i saw on their notice that it had a date and a hearing and i thought
hmm that's odd why isn't a similar sign posted on the other property let me go and look and i went
and i looked at the style street sign right and then i said oh this one is supposed to be posted
on both sides too and there is a hearing date and so okay so you were able to see the style
street sign is it yeah one thing you have to go and look for it it is about five feet off the
ground so that is eye level for most short folks right
Um, I am five foot five and it is higher than I am, but I did not measure it.
Um, you know, that was not a concern that I raised.
It's the fact that there was no sign whatsoever posted on Pennock street.
Right.
But a very large one posted on, on the, the larger width.
So it's a normal sized piece of paper.
On a large board.
Is that correct?
That's a relative question.
What is large?
Very good. I have nothing further. This is just a nuisance sort of complaint.
All right. Okay. That's okay. Mr. Rivera, thank you for your interest in the case. Is there anyone else in the virtual audience?
Chair, I see no hands at this time.
Planning Commission.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and good morning, David Fecto with the City Planning Commission.
the comprehensive plan recommends no change to the residential single -family zoning at this
location the appellant requests variances for rear yard depth which is approximately 30 percent
smaller than it's allowed and for off -street parking the appellant has shown the proposed
lot presents a unique physical condition necessitating the dimensional variance however
the city planning commission recommends the board grant the dimensional variance for rear yard depth
but deny the proposed variance for off -street parking.
Thank you, David.
MI 2023, 00947, 1234, Pennock Street, I vote yes.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes.
Thank you, counsel.
Also, number 13, MI 2023 -00925 -1230 South 26th Street, Brandon Saverin is the attorney.
Letter of support from residents organized for advocacy and direction.
Morning, counsel. Good morning, Mr. Chairman. Could you state your name, please, and spell for
the court stenographer? Yes, my name is Brandon Saverin. That's B -R -A -N -D -O -N. Last name is S
as in Sam. A -V as in Victor. I'm sorry. S as in Sam. A -V as in Victor. R -A -N as in Nancy.
Do you swear, Fern, to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do. Do you identify your client in a relationship to this property?
Yes, my client is Paramount Property Investments, LLC, which is the owner of the property.
Our vice chair has just a few questions.
Good morning, counsel. Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Good morning, Mr. Vice Chairman. So I agree to waive the reading of the refusal. I do not agree to stipulate to its accuracy. I'll detail that during my presentation.
Understood. Have you emailed in all the required documents and exhibits that are needed and required to proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing?
Understood.
Have you emailed in all the required documents and exhibits that are needed?
Yes, I have. And I just want to add that yesterday, so the only exhibit that came to the board after the five -day mark was a letter of non -opposition we received from the Office of Council Member Johnson.
Understood. Please proceed and share your screen.
Thank you.
Mr. Saverin, this is Hillary. We did not receive the letter from Councilmember Johnson, so if you could please forward that to us so it can be included in the record, that would be great.
The second we're done here, absolutely.
I just want to thank you in advance for bearing with me. I have a little bit of a cold here.
Well, good morning, members of the board. So the property I'm here to present to you about today is 1230 South 26th Street. This property is at the northwest corner of South 26th Street and Oakford Street in the Grays Ferry neighborhood.
This in Exhibit 7 is what I'll start with.
This is a series of the photos of the posting of notices for this hearing.
It's a good opportunity to show you what the existing building looks like.
It's a two -story building on a lot that is a bit wider than your typical building in South Philadelphia, perhaps because it's a corner lot.
It's 18 feet wide, and then it has a significantly deep frontage on Oakford Street.
side street. I'll just scroll through these photos a bit. This property was purchased by
my client in 2019. It has a history during the prior decade before my client's ownership of
L &I violations. You know, just sort of looking at the interior hadn't been really meaningfully
renovated in a very long time. Further, the neighboring property to the right here at 1228
South 26th Street, was issued an unsafe structure violation by L &I in 2021. One of the consequences
of whatever is going on with that neighboring building is that it sort of structurally shifted
into our building, which means that we need to sort of fix the party wall and, you know,
make sure that there is no structural impacts on our building. It is vacant right now, our
building, to ensure the safety of, you know, anybody that would occupy it. So for all of those
reasons, we need to undertake a rehabilitation and renovation of our building. And because the
cost of doing so is so substantial, we're going to add a third story to this building, because as
I'll show you in a moment, this block of 26th Street has other three -story buildings. So that's
not at all out of context. And the addition in terms of its height will be by right. And we're
going to put the building back in service as three dwelling units, one per floor, which as I'll show
you in our floor plans in a moment, the building can very easily accommodate. I'll just go to
exhibit 11 and quickly show you a rendering of by our architect of what this might look like when
it's completed. So it's a purely vertical addition that we're proposing. And again, the height is by
right. There's no horizontal expansion of the building on any floor. For instance, this bay
window that you're seeing on the Oakford Street side, this already exists on the second floor.
So we're just, you know, basically putting another layer of the cake directly on top.
The bay window will be, you know, extended perfectly upwards.
I'll show you our notice of refusal at Exhibit 2A of my exhibit binder that I sent in.
And I'll address that sort of perhaps incorrectly written refusal in a moment.
um the the the proposal generated um two use refusals which are highly related um and then
one dimensional refusal so let me start with the use refusals um we're zoned cmx2 that means that
we're required to have a commercial use on the ground floor um the other corners or or at least
I believe, two of the other corners on our intersection of 26th and Oakford are also zoned CMX2.
But those properties also do not have commercial uses at the ground level.
So because of that, we felt that despite the zoning, there is no market.
So because of that, we felt that despite the zoning, there is no market in this location for commercial use at the ground floor.
You could kind of see that in my photos. It's a purely residential context, at least right here.
And the RCO is in support of that concept of, you know, keeping this residential.
So that was the cause of one refusal. The cause of another refusal is the number of dwelling units.
So, we have a lot that has a property, a lot area at the ground level of 954 square feet. If our property was only six square feet larger, that's six, so really de minimis little amount, what we would be permitted is one commercial unit and two dwelling units.
So that would be a total of three units. And what I'm sort of asking in layman's terms, the board to do here is to give us the benefit of the doubt and treat this property as though it were 960 square feet as opposed to 954.
and then instead of allowing us to have two residential units and one commercial unit
to have three residential units I have sort of more technical legal justifications for these
variances in my memorandum that said exhibit one of my exhibit binder but I'll spare you sort of
talking through those they are in your possession though and then with regard to the one -dimensional
refusal. I think the examiner got this one wrong. It's for rear yard depth. And while there should
be a refusal for rear yard depth, this is not the correct refusal, because what we're doing,
and I'll show you this on our plan in a moment, is we are continuing an existing condition.
So what that should have triggered was a refusal for an unpermitted continuation of the existing
size of the rear yard under the, I believe it's 143056, that section of the code, that's about
non -conformities. The examiner wrote this up as though, you know, we're making the rear yard
smaller. That's not the case. So let me go to our zoning plan at exhibit 10.
okay that is way too zoomed in excuse me
um so here's what we submitted to l and i in order to draw our refusals um you know bird's
eye view site plan of the property here um just to give you a sense of uh of a visual with regard
to that rear yard issue so at the ground level our rear yard is over 10 feet deep so that exceeds
the code minimum. At the existing second level of the home is a bay window in the rear. Now,
you are supposed to count the depth of that bay window. And if you do so, it does put us at seven
feet, eight inches of rear yard depth. So that is what the examiner picked up on. And we will be
extending that bay window upward, as I mentioned, just as we're going to do with the other bay
window I showed you on the side of the property. But again, this is an existing condition because
the bay window is already present at the second floor. And there's more than nine feet of rear
yard depth at the ground level with an entire floor of a clearance to walk under the bay window.
So as a human being experiences that rear yard, it is deeper than the code allows. It's a genuine
backyard. There's going to be a trash storage facility back there. So anyway, that's to say
that I think it's a hardship to, you know, make us, I suppose what we'd have to do is not extend
the bay window because it would result no benefit to the users of this property and this sort of
ugly architectural asymmetry where we're going to have a bay window on the second floor, but not
the third floor. Our architect Chris did prepare some really nice looking floor plans. No offense
to him, but I'm going to kind of breeze through these pretty quickly. It's one unit per floor.
Every unit has at least one whole floor to itself. So the first floor is configured as a one bedroom.
I mean, you can see this is very spacious. It's over 600 square feet. It's got, you know, a living
area in the front with this front patio at the street level. The first floor unit has its own
entrance off of Oakford Street with sort of like a stoop that's already present. The second and
third floor units are accessed off of 26th Street, so off of that front patio area, and we're going
uh patio area and we're gonna uh sort of replace uh some concrete along oakford street with some
to sort of replace some of that.
uh plantings um and the last thing i want to go over is just the context of the block
at exhibit 12 um this is a sorry it came out a little grainy but this is a photo from atlas
atlas .phila .gov of our block if you were to walk out of our front door and turn left to look at the
remainder of our block of 26th Street. What you're going to see here is what I mentioned earlier.
It's a mix of two and three -story buildings. You know, here's a genuine three -story building.
Here's a two -story building, but with a roof that sort of, you know, extends its height. Here's
another three -story building. Here's another three -story building. So it's a mix. And, you
know, our addition is by right again in terms of height. And then finally, I know the board takes
an interest in the question of are there other multifamily uses on the block? I just pulled a
couple permits for examples to show you the answers yes. This is the property on the other
end of the block at the intersection with Federal Street. This was permitted as a duplex in 2018 by
this board. This next one is a permit for a building in the middle of the block, so closer to
us at 1216 South 26th. This is a three -unit building with one unit being commercial or at
least registered as at that time and two units being residential. So sort of a similar layout
to ours, I bet this was granted by this board as a variance in 2013. I think that's my presentation.
Happy to answer questions. I have our architect, Chris Karakoff, here to answer questions.
and how about the the clients the client here to adopt your testimony yeah so there are a couple
the owners and it's either yuri jacobson or uh cindy securo there's yuri
i could you say good morning could you state your name and spell for the court sonographer
yuri jacobson u -r -i jacobson j -a -c -o -b -s -o -n right do you swear or affirm to tell the truth
the whole truth and nothing but the truth. I do. Proceed, counsel. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Good morning, Yuri. Did you hear my testimony on Zoom in your zoning case this morning?
Yes, I did. Was it true and accurate to the best of your knowledge, information, and belief?
Yes, I do. Would you therefore adopt it as if it were your own testimony?
I do. And finally, are you authorized to speak on behalf of Paramount Property Investments?
Yes, I do.
That's your company?
Yes, me and my wife.
Thank you.
All right, questions from the board?
No, Mr. Chairman.
No, Chair.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
I see no hands at the sign.
Planning Commission.
David?
David?
Apologize, Chair.
No, no, no, fine.
Okay, let me pull up my chart here.
Thank you, Chair, and good morning.
David Fechtow with the City Planning Commission.
The comprehensive plan recommends a change in zoning at this location from commercial mixed use to residential single family.
Converting the ground floor of this building to commercial use would be impractical, which is why the comprehensive plan recommends residential use.
The appellant has shown that the non -compliant rear yard is an existing condition.
However, the appellant has not shown why a third dwelling unit is necessary to allow the appellant to derive value from the property.
So the city planning commission recommends the board grant the proposed variances for rear yard depth and lack of commercial space, but deny the proposed third dwelling unit.
Thank you.
Quick, just real quick response.
I mean, the reason we need the third dwelling unit is because our property is in terrible
shape and it's documented by L &I.
Our neighbor is in terrible shape and has partially fallen into our building.
So we have to fix this.
We have to have a way to subsidize the cost of doing so.
And again, if we were six square feet larger in terms of lot size, given our zoning, we'd
be permitted to have a total of three units, although one of them would have to be commercial.
Thank you. MI 2023, 000925, 1230 South 26th Street, I vote yes.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes. Ishmael Shahid, my vote is yes.
Thank you, counsel. Thank you very much.
Number 14, MI 2022.
Number 14, MI -2022 -003 -865 -4063 Holland Street.
Vern Anastasio is the attorney.
Letter of support from the Juniata Park Civic Association with Proviso.
Minister Anastasio, you've already been sworn.
Just state your name for the record.
Mr. Chair, this is Hillary.
Proceed, Hillary.
Yes, I was going to say, we've also received a letter in non -opposition from Council Member Lozada.
Okay. All right. Mr. Anastasio, just state your name for the record. You've already been sworn.
Sure. Vern Anastasio, representing Carlos Rivera.
Okay. Our Vice Chair has just a few questions.
Good morning, Council. Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
i do have you emailed in all the required documents and exhibits that are needed to
receive this case five days in advance of this hearing i have thank you please proceed and
share the screen thank you
bear with me for some reason the computer is acting slow today all right
Okay, Mr. Chairman, 4063 Howland Street.
We're trying to legalize a two -family household living
in an existing structure.
This property is a two -family dwelling.
You're on the first floor.
As you can see, large living room, the laundry room.
Two, one bedroom, a kitchen and a bath.
And here's the second floor as it currently exists.
I've got your overhead and we've got,
as you can see here,
the electric has already been divided with two,
one for each unit and one house account.
We have interior photos, we've met with the community, show them the photos, and explain to them the history of the property.
I will share with you, as you can see, two -family dwelling as far back as 1956, I'm sorry, 1988
is this particular document.
So it's been 40 -plus years as a two -family dwelling was also a variety store at one point on the first floor.
But it has not been a single -family dwelling in modern history.
We, as I said, met with the community.
We mailed 159 individual households.
the community had a proviso that there be no living space in the basement be strictly for
storage of the other two for the other two units we agreed to that and given the history of the
property of it being multi -use being that it was in fact at some point a two -family dwelling
It still has separate electricity. And given the fact that we have unanimous support from the community pending that proviso, we respectfully request the granting of the variance.
Is your client here, Mr. Anastasia?
He should be. Mr. Carlos Rivera, I would call to raise his virtual hand.
Carlos Rivera, please unmute yourself and wait for the chair.
Morning, sir. Could you state your name, please, and spell for the court stenographer?
Yeah, my name is Carlos Rivera. C -A -R -A -O -S -O -R -I -V -E -R -A.
Right. Do you swear or affirm, tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Proceed, counsel.
Thank you. Mr. Rivera, did you hear my presentation to the board?
Yes, I did.
Is it true and accurate to the best of your knowledge?
and do you adopt it as your own testimony
yes sir
thank you
questions from the board
questions from the board no mr chairman no mr chairman no chair thank you questions or comments
questions from the board
from the virtual audience yeah i see no hands at this time planning commission thank you chair and
good morning david effecto with the city planning commission the comprehensive plan recommends no
change the residential single family zoning at this location this property has a documented
history of use as two dwelling units. The City Planning Commission recommends the board grant
the use variance for two dwelling units. Thank you. MI 2022 003865 4063 Holland Street. I vote yes
with proviso. Use of basement limited to laundry, storage, and mechanicals.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes with proviso.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes with proviso.
Thank you, counsel.
Thank you.
Is there anyone in the virtual audience whose 930 case has not been called?
Chair, I see no hands at this time.
Thanks, everyone.
See everyone at 2 o 'clock.
All right.
my name is bill okay we're ready we're ready
i'm sorry sorry you're going to check on a court reporter please mr kelly
i'm sorry yes i am here all right perfect i'm sorry continue please ready to go
Yes. Okay. Good afternoon. My name is Bill Bergman, and I will be chairing this afternoon's
EBA hearings. With me is our Vice Chair, Ishmael Shahid. Present, Mr. Chairman.
Our Board Member, Thomas Holliman.
Present, Mr. Chairman. And our Board Member, James Snell.
Present, Mr. Chairman. Also present is Hillary Emerson, our attorney.
and our Executive Director, Tanya Sunkett.
Here's our virtual format.
Be advised if the proceedings are being recorded.
The video will be available by contacting tanyasunkett at philo .gov.
For the benefit of our court stenographer,
we ask attorneys and witnesses to identify themselves before testifying.
If you're not participating by phone, if you are participating by phone,
if you wish to testify, press star 9 to raise your hand and star 6 to unmute.
to an appearance statement, call 267 -270 -5548. Leave your email and the address of the property
in question. And finally, the question answer box on the screen is now for comments or testimony.
Any comments should be directed to our executive director, Tanya Selkin.
Let's look at this afternoon's schedule for continuances. Number four, MI 2022 -007 -295 -5737
Elmwood Avenue. That case is continued. And number nine, MI 2023 -001 -536 -6109 Market Street.
That case is continued. Are there any comments relative to the cases I just continued?
Good afternoon, Chair. This is Yvette Benton. I'll be your co -host for this afternoon,
and I see no hands at this time. Are there any other requests for continuances?
chair we have a bridget powell with their hand up they have been unmuted and allowed to speak
hi could you state your name please and spell for the court stenographer
miss powell please unmute yourself
miss powell could you state your name and spell for the court stenographer can you hear me i can
Can you hear me?
Yeah, I can.
Bridget Powell, B -R -I -D -G -P -O -W -E -L -L.
Right.
Right. Do you swear, Fern, to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Do you swear, Fern, to tell the truth, the whole truth,
and nothing but the truth?
What case are you involved with?
I just wanted to...
6109 Market Street.
We see that?
that was the one we just continued mr chair okay that case has been continued ma 'am
okay and we'll get a new date when it will absolutely
okay all right thank you are there any other requests for continuances
chair i see no additional hands at this time thank you
so let's go to our add -on list number one MI 2023 000 277 1222 Hallworth Hallworth Street
I vote yes temporary variance to expire 8326
James Snell, I vote yes, with proviso.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes, with proviso.
Thank you.
Thomas Holliman, my vote is yes, with proviso.
Thank you, Tom.
Number two, MI 2022 -007 -546 -138 -40 Tasker Street.
I vote yes with proviso.
Her amended refusal dated 7 -18 -23.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes with proviso.
James Snell, my vote is yes with proviso.
I vote.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes with proviso.
Doctor, we're going to re -vote a case from this morning.
So the vote will be myself, Thomas Hobbes, and Ishmael.
MI 2023 -00972 -313 West Somerset Street, I vote yes.
The approval is for two -family household living above a vacant commercial space on the first floor.
Use registration required prior to occupancy for vacant commercial space.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes with proviso.
Ismail Shahid, my vote is yes with proviso.
Thank you.
We're going to go to number one.
MI 2022 -006 -187, 7054 Forrest Avenue. Daniel Reisman is the attorney.
Letter of support from the 10th Ward Democratic Committee. Letter of support from Council Member
Phillips. Applicant also provided six foreign letters of support from neighbors in the 7 ,000
block of Forest Avenue. Mr. Reisman is coming back in as a panelist, Chair. Thank you.
Hi, Mr. Reisman. Could you state your name, please, and spell for the court reporter?
Unmute yourself.
Mr. Reitman, you're muted. Can you hear me? I can hear you now. Could you state your name,
please, and spell for the court reporter? Yes, it's Daniel Reisman, R -E -I -S -M -A -N.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
I do. But do you identify your client in relationship to this property?
Yes, my client is the owner of the property, McDougal LLC.
All right. And our vice chair has just a few questions, sir.
Good afternoon, counsel. Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Yes, I do.
Have you emailed in all the required documents and exhibits that are needed to proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing?
Yes, I have.
Great. Thank you. Please proceed and share your screen.
Okay. Can you see my screen?
We can.
Okay. The property is, and I'm here with my client, Jen Edinger. I've submitted to the board to the ZBA exhibits, which
The I've submitted to the board to the ZBA exhibits, which you'll see on the left side of my screen, exhibits one through 10.
They include photos, maps and letters of support. As the chair mentioned, the letters of support are from Councilman Phillips and the RCO, 10th Ward Democratic Committee.
The property is located at 7054 McDougal. I'm sorry, Forrest Avenue. And here's the map of the property. Google map. Here's the property. Here's Forrest Avenue. And it's near the corner with Middleton Street.
Here's an aerial view of the property.
And here's a view of the property from the front.
I'm going to show you some photos of the property now, some other photos.
Here's the property.
And in terms of the history of the property,
since 19, the proposal is to continue the use
of the property as a duplex,
which has been its historic use
that recently lapsed the permit for a duplex.
I've included as an exhibit number six,
the prior permit that was issued in 1949.
and here's the permit. And you'll see that the permit shows the present use at that time was
60 with single dwelling, proposed use to family dwelling, and that was approved in 1949.
Since that time, until very recently, the property has been used as a duplex.
My client purchased the property in 2013. Here's the city search statement,
and you'll see on the cert statement, again, it shows legally registered use for the property
as a two -family dwelling. The interior photos show, number one, that my client has recently
renovated both units. Currently, the first floor is vacant, and the second floor is occupied by
a tenant. Now, if you look at the photo here, you'll see that since 1949, so we're talking 70
years, the property has physically been divided into two units. So here's the front of the
property. And you'll see this is the door that leads upstairs to unit two. And here's the door
that's unit one. The property interior of the property is physically laid out as two separate
units, and the interior photos show that. So there are two separate kitchens, two bathrooms,
separate gas, separate electricity, separate furnaces. So the property has effectively been
used this way for 70 years. As I stated, the permit recently left, so we're simply back to
reinstate the longstanding permit. One other point is that the use of the property as a two -unit
dwelling is very consistent with what's on the immediate block. Here's a plan that we've
prepared. This shows all structures on the property that are used for two or more units.
And all told, you'll see that there are a total of 13 structures on the block that are used for
two or more units. Two of them are actually for five units at the corners. These are all two
units. And then you'll see here are some photos showing all these other properties. There's the
five units. You'll see this one has first floor. So this is one that's two units. Here's another
two units. So the use is not only 70 years, over 70 years that it's been used, but it's also very
consistent with the uses on the block. And we're just simply seeking to continue this longstanding
use. And that's it. Adopt your testimony. Yes, I would. Jen Edinger, could you please raise your
your hand on the remote.
Chair Jennifer Enger has been unmuted and allowed to speak.
Hi, could you state your name, please, and spell for the court reporter?
Yes, good afternoon. My name is Jennifer Enger. It's E -H -I -N -G -E -R.
I -N -G -E -R.
You swear her for her to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but...
You swear or firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, sir.
Proceed, counsel.
Ms. Enger, did you hear my statements?
And are they true and correct to the best of your knowledge, information, and belief?
And you adopt them as your own?
Thank you.
Thank you.
Questions from the board?
No, Mr. Chairman.
No, Mr. Chairman.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
Chair, I see no additional hands at this time.
Thank you.
Planning Commission.
Ron Bednar, City Planning.
First name, Ron, R -O -N.
Last name, Bednar, B -E -D -N -A -R.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Please proceed.
The property is indicated for residential use on the city plan,
Given its documented use history, the physical condition of the property, we recommend the request of variance to be granted.
Thank you. MI 2022 -006 -167 -7054 Forest Avenue, I vote yes.
James Snell, I vote yes.
Ishmael Shaheem, my vote is yes.
Counsel, you have your three votes.
Thank you, Mr. Chair, members of the board.
We're going to hear three cases together.
It'll be number two, number five, and number seven.
Number two, MI 2022, 006 -127, 1433 North 17th Street.
Number five, MI 2022, 006 -105, 1412 North 17th Street.
And number seven, MI -2022 -006 -107 -1421 North 17th Street.
Aisha, you have a comment?
Yes, Chair.
I'm going to actually recuse myself from these three cases.
Thank you.
So Matthew Monroe is the attorney for the purchaser and also Leonard Reuter.
Could he please come on too?
both of them have been promoted to panelists chair i mr monroe could you state your name
please and spell for the court reporter sure um good afternoon chairman bergman members of the
board matthew monroe m -a -t -t -h -e -w monroe m -o -n -r -o -e do you swear for him to tell the truth
the whole truth nothing but the truth i do um leonard could you state your name please and
did i swear you once that i swore you in once that i just state your name for the record
leonard we can't hear you whoops sorry can you hear me now okay sure uh leonard f reuter r -e -u -t -e -r
senior attorney for the city of philadelphia okay um mr monroe will present his case leonard then
will bring you one. Do you stick late to the reading and the accuracy of the
refusals? Yes, Chairman, with one quick caveat, I think for 1412 through 18 North 17th Street,
which is MI -22006105. The plans examiner did not include the multiple addresses for the
consolidation of this particular property. We have requested, I believe with the consent of
the zoning board, an amended refusal to correct so all the addresses are included, but with the
remainders there. Okay. And just for point information, we have letters of support from
the council president, from state representative Kenyatta, state senator Street, and a letter of
support from the United Neighbors Alliance Civic Association. So why don't you begin?
Good afternoon, Chairman Bergman. And I believe you've had trouble hearing me recently. Can you
hear me all right? We'll hear you fine. Okay. These three applications are on behalf of
a nonprofit purchaser Pathways Housing Wellness Corporation, which is a nonprofit corporation that
seeks to build affordable housing in abandoned and blighted neighborhoods and areas that need
and areas that need the affordable housing. We have these properties under agreement with the
the affordable housing.
City of Philadelphia and the Philadelphia Housing Corporation and the Land Bank. Those documents
and the ownership documents are included in each of the three presentation packets, and I'll just
run through generally what they are. We have the titles in lieu of deed at Exhibit 1, and each of
these packets are uniform, the refusals at Exhibit 2, the applications for appeal at Exhibit 3,
along with proof of service to the RCOs and the near neighbors. And Chairman, we met with the
registered community organization back in December after providing proper notice,
but this was a second meeting. Initially, my client reached out to the community and met
with BEACH, which was a registered community organization we believed was going to be the
the correct RCO. But in any event, we had more meetings than we were required to have
along the way, but ultimately did reach the right one at United Neighbors and got their full
support. We posted notices, and then we attached the site plans, context photographs,
the RCO support letters, and then the tax certifications. We have printouts from the
City website showing zero tax balance for each of the properties to establish standing.
So effectively, Chairman, these existing properties are blight and vacant lots.
They're now part of what Pathways is calling the 17th Street revitalization.
There are three properties, and I would just scroll down to the plans, but there's effectively
taking multiple properties, doing three consolidations into parcel A,
Parcel B and parcel C. The only reason why we are here today at the Zoning Board is because we are making efforts to provide the required parking for the two multifamily properties.
Just to kind of break these out, there is a proposal for 12 non accessory parking spaces, including two ADA spaces.
to provide off -site parking for 1733. It's located at 1433 through 37 North 17th Street.
It is on the same block as Parcel A and Parcel B, which are slated to have two. Each of them
have a three -story multifamily development on Parcel A, a proposal for 19 units. We have no
refusals for the dimensions or the use for Parcel A, which is 1412 through 18th North 17th Street,
and we do not have a dimensional or use refusals for the number of units, that is,
for 21 units at 1421 North 17th Street, which is Parcel B. While the zoning code does permit
for off -site parking in some zoning districts, there's not such a provision in this RM1 zoning
district and the layout and space necessitates zoning variance under 148029. And I understand
that the board has a a busy docket so i will just kind of quickly get to my primary points one uh
you can see in the refusal for 1412 north 17th street and this is the refusal that we need to
get corrected to add the additional addresses for the consolidation um we are required to provide
under this north central district overlay five uh parking spaces um and as you can see from the
plans. Let me scroll down. There is not adequate space for on -site parking. And here you can see
proposed building B here, which is the plan that's requested. And then parking lot C would be
across the street located at the 1433. And you can see here the three plans, the site plans,
breaking down the parking space, the parking lot, which is at 1433. And again, the only reason why
we're here is to provide adequate parking for these two multifamily buildings at Building A
and Building B, which will be providing affordable housing through charitable giving and state
funding and government funding to provide the development of this project. So this was simply
a technical refusal and um and we are meeting the intent and uh the intent of the zoning code uh
meeting the intent and the intent of the zoning code by providing this parking. It's simply just
across the street and in a in a location right by there. There will be additional bike parking
located within the building to meet the the requirements for bicycle parking. But this
project is in keeping with the city's policy to provide affordable housing as as the chair
probably is well aware in this area, it's difficult to meet these types of affordable
housing development and make them profitable. But this is a nonprofit organization that has
plenty of experience doing this. They have adequate staff, they have adequate funding
sources, and they're simply looking to fill in a gap that is in dire need here in Philadelphia
by making this affordable housing project happen.
And with that, that is the application in a nutshell.
And we did provide the three separate application packets
which were received by the board.
And aside from the amendment to refusal for 1412,
this should be all we need to move forward.
And with that, I would just ask if my client, Christine, the president of Pathways, could raise her virtual hand just to adopt my factual statements as her testimony.
Could you state your name, please, and it's spelled for the court stenographer?
Ms. Viriglia, you've been unmuted.
Aye. Please state your name and spell for the court stenographer.
Christine Simiriglia. S -I -M -I -R -I -G -L -I -A.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, sir.
Proceed, counsel.
Good afternoon. Did you hear the factual statements I made for the record?
And were they correct?
Do you adopt them as your testimony?
Thank you.
And Leonard, would you make a presentation?
Yeah, so I just want to clarify, I'm not here representing the city as a party or anything
like that in this case, Mr. Monroe's client.
I'm here basically to affirm that Mr. Monroe's clients do in fact have the authority of the
City, Philadelphia Redevelopment Authority, and Land Bank, and also Philadelphia Housing Authority
to proceed with these applications and with this variance that's pursuant to a resolution passed
by City Council with respect to the city properties, a resolution by PRA Board with respect to their
properties and land bank. My understanding is that the PHA properties, they may proceed with
the application because it's pursuant to a lease, I believe a lease agreement was signed.
An agreement of sale.
Yeah, I'm sorry, an agreement of sale.
We have an agreement of sale, yes.
Right. However, I do understand, I think, and it's related, I believe, mostly to the
uh discrepancy with the uh consolidation of the 1412 uh north 17th street 1412 1416
and eight and 18 um yes that uh will need an updated refusal there and i believe an updated
letter uh and actually ms emerson can clarify if she needs to on that so you have authorization
letters from the Planning Commission that was sent, I'm sorry, from the Department of Planning
and Development by Deputy Mayor Ann Fadulin. She sent that on the 20th. And then you have another
letter from Bridget Collins -Greenwald, Commissioner of Public Property, which was also sent on July 20th.
um and like i said i think we do need to get updated authorizations um and you know if if
necessary ms emerson can explain what the additional authors or what the amended
authorizations need to need to state but otherwise yep in case there were any questions this has all
uh been approved by the city hillary do you want to respond about what we're going to hold a vote on
right no thank thank you leonard and thank you matt for explaining that yes the the refusal for
1412 North 17th Street should have should have also referenced a lot consolidation as well as
included 1414, 1416 and 1418 North 17th Street. 1414 and 1418 are PHA owned properties. Those were
Those were included in the agreement of sale that was submitted with the applications.
included in the agreement of sale that was submitted.
14 .16 is a city of Philadelphia property that was not included in the prior authorizations because we were not aware it was part of the project as it was not listed on the refusal.
So we will get updated, request updated authorization letters just to include that one additional address.
Okay. And just so I'm clear, Ms. Emerson, the agreement of sale for PHA is sufficient to establish their equitable ownership. So we don't need anything. We don't need a separate letter covering that, right?
That is correct. Yes. Thank you.
Okay. So Hillary, we want to vote on two and seven.
That is correct, Mr. Chair.
All right. Let me make sure Tom's okay. Mr. Holliman, are you coming in?
Mr. Holloman, please unmute yourself if you can.
I'm present, Mr. Chairman.
Okay, thank you.
So number two, MI -2022.
Mr. Chair, this is Hillary.
We still need to take testimony from the public as well as the Planning Commission's recommendation.
Oh, I'm sorry.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
chair i see no hands at this time planning commission ron bednar city planning this
applies to all properties that we're in consideration right now the adopted
comprehensive plan recommends no change to the zoning at these these locations there's no unique
physical circumstances were conditioned on the property that would prevent them from being used
and conforming with the parking requirements of the code.
There's also no valid reason why the appellant could not build, at least at the very minimum,
the required bicycle parking spaces within the boundaries of the proposed lots.
Planning Commission therefore recommends that the requested variance be denied.
Number two, MI 2022 -006 -127, 1433 North 17th Street, I vote yes.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes.
James Snell, my vote is yes.
And number seven, MI 2022 -006 -107 -1421 North 17th Street, I vote yes.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes.
Jane Snell, my vote is yes.
Right, and Hillary, number five will be continued until we have everything.
Mr. Chair, yes, number five, the vote will be held until we have a corrected refusal and the two updated authorization letters.
Otherwise, the record in that matter is closed.
Just for the record, that's MI -2022 -006 -105 -1412 North 17th Street.
Okay. Thank you, everyone.
Thank you, Chairman. Thank you, Member Support.
Thank you.
Thank you, Leonard.
Number three, MI -2023 -001 -411 -1807 Chestnut Street.
Al Nockamson is the attorney.
Letter of non -opposition from the Center City Residence Association.
Mr. Nockamson.
Mr. Nockamson is coming back in as a panelist now, Chair.
Hi, Mr. Nockamson, just for the, you've already been sworn today, just for the record,
could you state your name?
Yes, Alan Nockamson.
Could you identify your client in relationship to the property?
Yes, my client is Taylor Chip LLC, and in the virtual audience is one of its members,
Doug Taylor.
Okay, and our vice chair has just a few questions for you, sir.
This is the third one, right, Chair?
Number three.
Number three.
Is this one I'm still recusing?
No, no, no.
This is 1807 Chestnut Street.
Good afternoon, counsel.
Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Have you emailed in all the required documents and exhibits that are needed to proceed with
this case five days in advance of this hearing?
I have.
Thank you.
Please proceed and share your scheme.
Great.
Thank you.
So, I'm really excited to present this zoning matter 1807 Chestnut Street through this special
Through this special governmental approval we hope to get today, TaylorChip will be able to open its first operation in Philadelphia.
governmental approval we hope to get today.
We'll go through, you know, their history and, you know, why, you know, they're hoping to continue multiple shops in Philadelphia.
But first, we'll review the table of contents.
So this is not a variance.
This is we're seeking a special exception.
So this is a notice of referral, which is a much lesser standard.
We have a letter of non -opposition from the Center City Residence Association.
They have several provisos.
I will highlight the ones which I believe are enforceable provisos.
And we would request that only those provisos are the ones that attach to the zoning permit if the board feels so inclined.
We'll go through the history of tellership and who they are.
We'll quickly look at the cookies that they do sell, their reviews, which are stellar.
Maps of the area, photographs of the property, our plans and drawings, which include renderings of what Doug and Sarah envisioned with regards to their first location in Philadelphia.
Their RCO meeting notice, the applications for special exception, the lease of property, where they hope to be here for many, many years, and the certificate of tax clearance.
Again, in the virtual audience is Doug Taylor. At the conclusion of my presentation, I'll ask Doug to virtually raise his hand, be sworn in, and then get my testimony as his own.
All right, so the first thing is the notice of referral.
You know, this is, again, a CMX 5 property, and we're just looking to put a prepared food shop on the first floor.
Not out of character, we're a couple doors down from Midtown Continental.
There's many like prepared food shops or takeout shops of a similar ilk there as well as restaurants.
So this will fit in well within this part of Philadelphia.
And the only refusal or here the referral that we have is because the proposed use prepared food shop requires a special exception because we're in the Chestnut Walnut Street area district.
And again, as you can see, in 2017, there was an approval for a takeout restaurant as well.
Letter of non -opposition.
Again, I think this is a pretty straightforward zoning matter.
And Center City Residents Association agreed as well.
There were several of these requirements.
And if you look at the bottom, the first one would be to provide an outdoor or outside container for trash disposal during the hours of operation.
We have no objection to that. We want to be a good neighbor, a responsible neighbor.
The second is we're going to label all of our disposable ware with the name of the company, as well as the address of the company on that.
We have no issue with that.
And then the third one is there's no amplified music outside the premises of the restaurant and no music from inside the restaurant, which will be audible outside the restaurant.
Again, we have no issue with that either.
And then just a little bit of history about Taylor Chipp.
Sarah and Doug started it as local locals in Lancaster, PA in 2015.
They got busy enough through their recipes to be able to quit their jobs in 2018.
Then they were awarded a grant in 2020 to be able to expand their business operations.
Well, I guess you take a step back in 2019, they introduced ice cream as part of their operations.
And they're opening up a they opened up a larger facility, a creamery facility, creamery facility in 2021.
Again, this is their first venture in Philadelphia.
And their plan is to open up several locations in Philadelphia within the next year.
And then this kind of goes to that.
They plan to open six locations throughout Pennsylvania. Three are in the works now. They have 50 team members. They had 100 % growth in 2022. And in 2023, they're opening up that creamery.
And in 2024, they're hoping to open up even more locations.
So they're really excited about this opportunity in Philadelphia.
They're well -known in social media.
I didn't even know that until I told someone I work with who we're representing, and they
indicated that his wife follows them, and they have a great following on social media.
I wish my firm had this much of a following.
They have 360 ,000 people on social media, and they're very active as well with emails
and stuff like that to their customers.
Cookies, like again, I think we in Philadelphia
are more familiar with Insomnia Cookies.
Again, similar type of platform.
They're very confident they'll do well here, as well as Insomnia Cookies.
They're very confident they'll do well here
as well as Insomnia Cookies.
And then their reviews.
I mean, they have 4 .7 stars based on almost 200 reviews.
Again, everyone's very excited about this.
The maps of the area, as you can see, we're in center, center city.
You know, CMX5 surrounds us.
So what we're offering is not out of character, would not cause more harm than you would generally suspect from an operation of a prepared food shop like this.
And again, you can see from the Google Maps perspective, there's business after business after business that's, you know, similar type, maybe not selling cookies to what tailorship is hoping to do.
And then photographs of the property. Right now, it's a four -story structure. We're looking to take the ground floor of this structure right here, which is approximately 900 square feet.
This is proof of the notice poster. Again, they're very excited. They put, you know, some, you know, again, a flat, what's it called, wrapping around the front, hoping, you know, as soon as they get this approval, to go through the L &I process and hoping to open up well before the end of the year.
And then this is Chestnut Street to the right of the property, Chestnut Street to the left of the property.
And then there are plants and drawings.
This is, again, much improvement to what's there right now, fully glassed up.
And then you can see here they sell some apparel here.
There is seating here, and they'll have both ice cream and cookies that they're going to sell.
This is from different angles.
and then here's just again just from a from more of a floor plan perspective of what those
renderings showed uh our community meeting was May 23rd 7 p .m it was a well -attended meeting
94 addresses were notified of that meeting was the addresses proof of mailing to those addresses
or applications for special exception again we're not seeking a variance we're seeking
a special exception, or a referral, or project information form, or a lease to the property.
It's going to go quickly through it. And most importantly, the tax clearance as well. So with
that being said, I would ask that Doug virtually raise his hand. Could you state your name,
please and spell it for the court stenographer.
Doug Taylor, please unmute yourself and wait for the chair.
Sir, could you state your name and spell it, please?
Doug, D -O -U -G, Taylor, T -A -Y -L -O -R.
Right. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Proceed, counsel.
Yes. Doug, you heard everything I had to state today about your zoning matter.
And was it true and correct?
And do you adopt it as your own testimony?
Thank you.
Questions from the board?
No, Mr. Chairman.
No, Chair.
No, Chair.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
I see no hands, Chair.
Planning Commission.
This is Ron Bednar, City Planning.
The property is zoned for center city commercial use on the city plan.
The proposed proposal should have no more than an impact than would be expected given its specific location.
Therefore, we recommend that the board grant a special exception.
Thank you. MI 2023 -001 -411 -1807 Chesson Street. I vote yes.
Thomas Holloman. My vote is yes.
James Snell, my vote is yes.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes.
Thank you, counsel.
Thank you.
Number six, MI 2023, 001 -598 -1500 North A Street.
Richard DeMarco is the attorney.
We're waiting for an RCO letter.
all right. Richard DeMarco is coming back in as a panelist.
Mr. DeMarco, state your name, please, and spell for the court stenographer. Did you do that?
Did I swear you once that I think I did, right? Just state your name.
You're in the 930 case.
Yep. Okay. Just state your name for the record.
Richard DeMarco, D -E -M -A -R -C -O.
Can you identify your client and relationship to the property?
Yes. It's Prestige Design on 8th, and Ophir Kamarian is in the virtual audience.
Okay. Our vice chair has just a few questions.
Ish? I do wave and step. Okay. Proceed. Share your screen and proceed. No problem. Good afternoon, everyone. So this is an existing commercial space that I'll go ahead and share my screen.
I do wave and step.
um it's an existent oh that didn't work hold on there it goes um we are refused uh because the
underlying zoning classification is rsa5 single family residential however the building
is a commercial structure mixed -use structure that uh on a corner property that this board
did grant a variance for a few years ago. We intended, and this board granted a variance for
a grocery store on the first floor. However, COVID hit around the same time. The grocery store never
got off its feet and left the project completely, leaving the existing commercial space empty.
We have tried to market the property for a grocery store, which was the variance originally granted by this board. We could not get a grocery store to locate in the property. This is the property. It is this space here, along with some basement space that is the property at issue. There are apartments above. And again, this was a matter that was granted by the board three years ago.
We tried to market the property for other uses that would be closer to a grocery store or another use than the one we are proposing today.
The only use, this is the basement space, by the way, the only use that was interested in the space was an event space, which was deemed by the owner to be counter to the neighborhood and also his tenants that live above.
That would result in a lot of noise, a lot of additional traffic, and was deemed to be problematic for everybody.
So the proposal is for a nail salon, which is not as intense as an event space.
There is interest by a nail salon to operate there.
This is the site plan.
And this will be just nail treatments, spa treatments, facials, pedicures, manicures, et cetera.
um hours of operation 9 a .m to 7 p .m monday through friday no late night hours no weekend hours
um we did meet with the rco senator kitchens rco uh we met with them last thursday uh the vote was
in favor of the project eight to three i spoke with the senator today she does not have her letter
ready, but she said she will have it by Friday. I spoke with the owner. We agree that the record
can remain open for a week or two, but we ask that we not have to come back and that the case
be voted upon submission of her letter. But the vote was 8 -3 in favor, so we don't expect
opposition here. This is the original permit. You can see here on your screen, Mr. Chairman,
That's the calendar number of the original case, which was for a grocery store and three units above.
Obviously, the argument is that the property itself has created a hardship.
It is a legally constructed property.
By the way, for the board's edification, there was a history of commercial use at this property.
So that was the reason why the zoning board granted the variance initially.
we are now have a situation where we cannot get usage of the third floor with other than the use
that's proposed um there'll be commercial trash pickup uh an existing nail salon at seventh and
gerard will be having another operation at this space they are an established business
um and i think that's all i have with that i will ask ophir kamarian to raise his hand
so he can adopt my testimony.
And this is the original decision of the board
back in 2019.
Ophir, can you raise your hand virtually, please?
There's no one listed by that name with their hand up.
We got a Jay Jamison.
That's him.
okay as an officer court um mr chairman i yeah well we will take your we recognize your testament
that's fine questions from the board no mr chairman no chair questions or comments from
the virtual audience here we have jay jameson okay
Here we have Jay Jameson.
Hi, could you state your name, please, and spell for the court stenographer?
Yes, my name is Justine Jameson, J -U -S -T -I -N -E, J -A -M -I -S -O -N.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Are you a neighbor?
Yes, I actually live on this exact hundred block.
Okay, proceed.
um my um comment more so not really a concern is as he stated they did have an event space there
um it was a major nuisance to the neighborhood this is a residential neighborhood it's not a
commercial neighborhood the issue is they're building also these high -rise apartment complexes
and there's no parking so i have a driveway so i've been in several incidents with patrons too
whether it was the event space or even tenants as far as not blocking our driveways and then even
with the trash I understand they said that they're going to have their own trash pickup which
I do notice that he does for his other units however the issue with the trash pickups is
they're not doing them enough or they're not trying to inform their tenants of the proper
ways to put out trash so our neighborhood went from once being fairly clean and you know a nice
place for our kids to play to now you can't walk down the street without being attacked by trash
okay um we we appreciate also well i already spoke on a parking spot step my father's here as well
um we both live on this block and he's saying something about parking as well because there's
no parking behind the facility either so they're going to have to park on our block which we
already don't really have parking i'm not speaking for anybody else when it comes to the parking
though my issue is just the blocking of our driveways because like i said i have a driveway
so street parking you know is up for grabs okay um thank you for taking the time to call in we
appreciate your comments thank you is there anyone else in the virtual audience one brief note mr
chairman for you we did actually have we did propose parking initially in the rear of his
property it was initially approved by this board but the streets department denied the uh permission
because it's against the street it's too close to the corner so we did try to include parking it was
it was denied thank you all right thank you anyone else in the virtual audience
there i see no other hands at this time planning commission it's not a run bednar city planning
the property is indicated for residential on the city plan in 2017 the zoning map was amended
from multi -family to single -family dislocation the pellet has not shown that the property cannot
be used in strict conformity with the code and that variance is therefore necessary to enable
viable use of the property city planning committee city planning commission recommends that the
uh zoning board deny the variance thank you i thought he okay i thought he said the opposite
but okay um so hillary we're gonna we're gonna close this except for an rco letter am i correct
yes mr chair um we can hold it we can hold it for two weeks and then we'll make sure we get
the letter and we'll make sure we get back to you okay fine so that would be um august august 16th
at 2 p .m we'll vote on this case
Thank you, Mr. DeMarco.
Thank you for your time, everyone.
Have a good afternoon.
Number eight, MI 2022 -007 -292 -2524 North 15th Street.
Vito Canuso is the attorney.
We have recommendation of support from the Uptown Entertainment and Development Corporation.
Mr. Canuso, if you're in the virtual audience, please raise your hand.
Mr. Canuso has been promoted to a panelist.
Good afternoon.
Good afternoon, Mr. Canuso.
Could you state your name and spell it for the court reporter, please?
Vito, V -I -T -O, Canuso, C -A -N -U -S -O, attorney for the owners of the property, Ms. Woods and Ms. Yelzmack.
Right.
Do you swear for them to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
I understand we're waiting for a tax clearance certification.
Yes, Mr. Chairman, as a matter of fact.
We're going to handle the case, but we won't vote until we get that, okay?
Thank you.
Our vice chair has a few questions for you.
Good afternoon, counsel.
Good afternoon, Counselor. Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal
and stipulate towards that?
Yes, sir.
Have you emailed in all the required documents and exhibits that are needed to proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing?
Yes, with the exception of the tax clearance document, which my client, as recently as this morning, has arranged arrangements for additional information to be supplied by one city agency to the Revenue Department, and hopefully that clearance will be obtained shortly.
Understood. And as the chair said, we will hear the case, but hold the vote. Please proceed.
We appreciate that.
If I proceed. Yes, please. With with me in my office here is Miss Woods, one of the co -owners of the property.
I would like to proceed based on the property owner's request and they are seeking to construct on this vacant lot.
And I will be hopefully sharing the screen, being able to share the screen for purposes of showing you the vacant lot that exists there at the current time.
Understood.
Red dot on the bottom, Mr. Knusho.
Yes, yes.
Thank you.
We have someone could give Mr. Canusa some instructions here.
Oh, wait, here we go.
Here we go.
We're getting there.
Okay. All right. Okay. Thank you.
I'm showing you the vacant lot with the photos.
and the photo also shows the notice that is being provided
to the public and on this vacant lot my clients are seeking to construct a three -story residence
with a lower -level two -family residential affordable housing.
We will include a roof deck for the occupant of the second and third floor
and an outdoor open area courtyard for the resident in the basement
or lower -level and first -floor portion of the building.
Unfortunately, this community is in need of high quality, affordable residential units, and we believe that the construction of this proposed use will be of benefit to the neighborhood.
Um, as, uh, we would like to go to, uh, the screen, which will show you the plans, uh, of the, um, of the, uh, actual, um, architect's drawings, uh, which, um, lay out that on the, um,
three -story in this three -story building with the use of the lower level
that there will be a bedroom and bath on the lower basement level and an additional room
that could be either used as a home office or a bedroom on the second or first floor level
That would be the living area and dining and kitchen area.
That would be the living area and dining and kitchen area and a bedroom to the rear.
And as you can see at the rear of the first floor, there would be access to the outdoor courtyard for use by the occupant of those two levels.
On the second level, we will have the living area, dining and kitchen area with a powder room or a half bath and also a bedroom.
The third floor will consist of two bedrooms and what I consider a substantially large bathroom, and that also will have access to the roof deck, which is also shown on these plans.
We also have a rendering of the front and the rear plans for this building as proposed by the owners.
Our request, we believe, will not impact negatively on the neighborhood.
Unfortunately, there are numerous multiple family dwellings in the area which are currently used similar to this property, though it is primarily a single family residence area.
area. And that is what the current zoning provides for this property. As the lot joins to the south,
the rear of the properties on Hazard Street, that would be the 1500 block of Hazard Street.
and to the north is the main street of Huntington and to the south is the major intersection with
Cumberland. There are numerous vacant lots in this area which do not lend to the benefit of
the neighborhood and we believe that this use for two families which is the only way that
affordable housing can be provided at this location is to have the property used for two
residents as to try to construct a single family residence for occupancy by someone at a reasonable
costs. We have met with the RCO, which was the Uptown Development Company. And as stated by
the chairman, we received a favorable result from that meeting with that group. We have attached
here to the notice of the meeting and then we also provided uh the results as presented which
there was no opposition to our request as a result of that meeting with the uh community group
um i would at this point like to uh uh have miss woods uh be permitted to
And counsel, one quick question, counsel, one quick question.
That block itself, the twenty five hundred block has multiple units on it.
Yes, we believe. And most of a lot of the block is is is vacant.
If you look at the Google Maps, we have a lot of vacant lots on that block, which, unfortunately, we can't make representation as to what that use will be in the future.
All right. Thank you.
could you state your name
please and spell for the court reporter
yes Ellie Woods
could you spell
your name too yes E -L -L -E
last name is W -O -O -D -S
do you swear or affirm
to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but
the truth I do
and you're one of
the owners of the property in
question here this afternoon
Ms. Woods
are you one of the owners of
this property in question here this afternoon? Yes, I am. And who is the other co -owner of the
property? Her name is Gözde Yılmaz. And what is your relationship to her?
Her name is Gözde Yilmaz.
And what is your relationship to her?
Partner.
And did you hear my statements to the board this afternoon?
I did.
And do you believe that they are accurate, true, and correct?
And do you adapt what I have stated to the board in this presentation today?
Thank you.
Questions from the board?
No, Chair.
Chair. Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
Chair, I see no hands at this time.
Planning Commission.
We're on Bednar City Planning. Property is indicated for residential use on a city plan or adopted district plan recommends no change to existing zoning in this location.
I believe the applicant's hardship is not supported with evidence of unique physical circumstances or condition of the property that would prevent it from being used in conformity with the code.
Therefore, we recommend requests for variance not be granted.
Thank you.
So, Hillary, we're going to close the case and hold it just for the receipt of a tax clearance cert?
That's correct, Mr. Chair.
The record is closed.
Two weeks?
Two weeks to vote?
We don't even need to put a date on this one, Mr. Chair.
we'll put it on an add -on once we receive the tax cert. Thank you. Thank you, Hillary. Thank
you, counsel. Thank you. Thank you. All right. Number 10, MI 2023 -001 -414 -1320
North 18th Street. Alan Notcomson is the attorney. Letter of support from United
Neighbors Alliance Civic Association, and also the applicant has provided a letter of support
from a neighbor. Mr. Nockleson is coming back and is a panelist, Chair. Thank you.
Good afternoon, Mr. Chairmembers of the Board. Alan Nockleson. Could you identify your client
in relationship to the property?
My client's the owner of the property,
1320 18th Street, LLC.
And in the virtual audience
is one of its members,
Markita Eshun.
And our vice chair
has just a few questions for you, sir.
Good afternoon, counsel.
Do you agree to waive
the reading of the refusal
and stipulate to its accuracy?
Have you emailed in
all the required documents
and exhibits that are needed
to proceed with this case
five days in advance of this hearing? Yes, we have. Thank you. Please proceed and share your screen.
Pretty straightforward matter. We're looking to put a triplex here at the corner of 18th and
Keshaw or Kershaw. And this board has heard a similar case a few years ago in which they
approved the variance request for whatever reason the previous owner of the property never built
upon it, my client has full intention to do so. So, you know, we're here today to hopefully get
that same variance approval that was given to someone else many years ago. So we have a table
of contents, which includes a notice of refusal. As indicated, we have a letter of support from
the United Neighbors Alliance Civic Association. It's property is located in the Francisville
section or a cabot section, I'm sorry, of Philadelphia. We have a letter of support from
a nearby neighbor who would be impacted by our project. What we're offering is not out of
character to what the zoning board has previously approved. And we took a detailed, we created a
detailed list of all the nearby variance projects that the board has approved and compared to our
project and would fall well in line with what was previously approved uh we also have that zoning
permit where again by way of zoning variance uh zoning permit was issued for a triplex many uh
years ago or i think it was like maybe five years ago so what we're asking for is not out of character
in that respect either maps of the area photographs of the property our plans and drawings the rco
meeting notice there it was a well -attended meeting and the the group voted overwhelmingly
in support of this project. Our application for appeal, our deeds of property, which shows the
1320 18th Street LLC is the owner, and their certificate of tax limits. As stated previously,
I have one of its members, Markita, in the virtual audience. I would ask that she virtually raise
her hand once I'm done with my presentation. She could be sworn in, and then she can adopt
my testimony as her own. So our notice of refusal, again, we're not seeking any dimensional
variances here. And we're a corner property. So we have the ability of every residence to
have access to the rear yard for trash storage and removal. So the only refusal we have here is
uh storage and removal so the only refusal we have here is the three dwelling units
uh it's a pretty sizable lot that's why we have no dimensional refusals and as you can see here
in 2017 this board under calendar number three one eight one four granted variance for three units
exactly what we asked are asking for letter of support from uh the united neighbors uh
Civic Alliance, Civic Association. They were very complimentary of my client, her presentation,
and the project as a whole. And then a letter of support from Kevin Matheson. His property is
around the corner from my client's property. His property would be impacted by this project,
and he has no objection to this increased density in this part of the city. And then nearby
multifamilies. So we did extensive research here. There's well over 20 properties. On average,
the square feet per unit is 475 .3 square feet per unit for these RSA -5 properties,
which receive variances. Ours is in line with that at 400 square feet per unit.
And then, again, most importantly, this board already heard a similar type of zoning request for this property and approved it in 2017.
So what we're asking for is not out of character to what this board has heard and has proved specifically with respect to this property.
And then maps of the area. Here we are, corner of Kershaw and 18th Street.
as you can also see, we're not that far away from our M1 property, which would allow this use as a
matter of fright. And then here we are too. You can see where we are in the neighborhood. We're
not that far off from Ridge, which has some commercial aspects to it. So it will help support
that commercial corridor as well. And then photographs of the property. This is the corner
of the property from 18th street uh north 18th street to the right of the property as you can see
right here is a four is a three unit as well because that's four meters one of course would
be for the common area north 18th street to the left of the property kershaw to the right of the
property kershaw to the left of the problem our here are our orange notice posters posted on both
sides, both Kodashaw and 18th Street, our plans and drawings. And then again, just to go quickly
through the floor plans, unit number one is the first floor and lower level. Unit number two is
the second floor. Unit number three is the third floor. Our RCO meeting notice we had our meeting
June 14th at 6 p .m. 173 addresses were notified of the meeting. List of the addresses. Proof of
mailing to those addresses.
Our application for appeal that we filed on behalf of 13 -20 -18 -18th ST -OLC, the owner
of the property, along with the notice of refusal and the project information form,
deed to the property showing that 13 -20 -18th ST -OLC is the owner of the property, as well
as the certificate of tax clearance showing no real estate taxes are owed as to this property.
I would ask that Marquita virtually raise her hand and be sworn in.
Hi, could you state your name, please, and spell for the court stenographer?
Chair Marquita Eshun has been unmuted and allowed to speak.
Hi, could you state your name and spell it, please?
Hi, Marquita Eshun, M -A -R -Q -U -I -T -A, Eshun, E -S -H -U -N.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Proceed.
Oh, yes.
Markita, you heard everything I had to state today about your zoning map.
And what I stated, was that true and correct?
And do you adopt it as your own testimony?
Thank you.
Thank you.
Questions from the board?
No, Chair.
No, Chair.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
i see no hands chair planning commission this is uh ron bednar city planning in 2017 the zoning
map in ludlow was uh were converted from residential multifamily to residential single
family at this location there's no unique physical circumstances or condition of this property
that would prevent it from being used in conformity with its current zoning code therefore
we recommend, of course,
variance not be granted.
Thank you.
MI 2023, 001 -414 -1320 North 18th Street.
0 -0 -1 -4 -1 -4 -1 -4 -13 -20 -N -18 -Street.
I vote yes.
James Snell, my vote is yes.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes.
Counsel, you have your vote.
Thank you. Have a great day.
Thank you.
Number 11, MI 2023 -001 -366.
3428 Vaughn Street. Daniel Reisman is the attorney.
Letter of non -opposition from the
Holmesburg Civic Association contingent on the parking being
removed. Letter of non -opposition from Council Member
Driscoll.
Chair Daniel Reisman is coming back in as a panelist now.
Good afternoon.
Could you just state your name for the record?
Yes, it's Daniel Reisman, R -E -I -S -M -A -N.
Right. Could you identify your client relationship to this property?
Yes, my client is Saul Real Estate, LLC. Dr. Jatin Mavalia, a principal, is here.
Okay, and our vice chair has just a few questions for you, sir.
Good afternoon, counsel. Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Yes, I do.
Have you emailed in all the required documents and exhibits that are needed to proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing?
Thank you. Please proceed and share your screen.
can you see the screen we can okay thank you again my name is daniel reisman i represent
the applicant i've submitted to the zba 11 exhibits they're listed to the left here
they include photos floor plans the rendering that you see on the screen right now and as the chair
mentioned a letter of non -opposition from the RCO. I don't know if you mentioned this, Mr. Chair,
but Councilman Driscoll also sent in a letter. I did. I mentioned that too. Yes. Okay. So you
have that as well. We do that. Okay. Thank you. And just to turn to the initial presentation,
there was an amendment to the refusal that the board should have. And that was based on the
request that the RCO made to remove the parking that you mentioned. And because of that, that
generated an additional refusal. With the board's leave, Tanya Sunkit, we went back to LNI, we
submitted amended plans. Without the parking, a new refusal was generated, and I sent that refusal
to both Ms. Sunkit and to Hillary Emerson, the board's attorney.
The proposal is to remove the existing structure, which is being used as a dental practice, and in its place, to construct a new structure, which you see again in the rendering, which will also be used as a dental practice.
I'm going to show you a few aerial photos of the property.
So you'll see this is the entire property.
Here's the existing structure.
Here's the remaining portion of the property, you'll see the grass.
It's at the corner of Ron Street and Leon Street.
Here's another area of the property.
And here's the zoning plan, and you'll see it shows it as being RSA 3.
Now for some photos of the property.
So here you'll see the property, and it actually has a very interesting history.
It was originally constructed as a single -family residence, which you can see.
One of the refusals is for the dental practice, which is considered group medical, and that generated refusal.
However, the property has actually been used as a dental practice for about 50 years.
I've included in Exhibit 7 a permit, a 1967 zoning permit, and the first floor was initially used as dental.
And the first floor was initially used as dental.
The second floor was used as dental.
The second floor was used as a residence.
In 1981, the zoning board approved the use of the entire structure as dental, both the first floor and the second floor.
So the zoning board has already approved historically this property for dental.
But because the proposal is to demolish this existing structure and construct a new structure, that generates, sort of re -ups everything.
And we're back now to seek an approval for continuing use of this property as a dental practice.
Now, if you look, and these are just more photos of the property.
This is a good view. If you look at the property from, I have a photo from Leon Street, you'll see that this is the property, this is the edge of it, and this is actually the rear yard of the property.
This is the property line right here. The property, the existing structure actually breaches the rear yard requirement for this zoning district. It's a 20 -foot rear yard requirement, and pretty much there's no rear yard at all.
So this is an existing nonconforming structure that we have right now. And as I'll show you, the new structure that's going to be constructed will actually comply in all senses and all requirements with all the dimensional requirements of the zoning code, which this current property does, the current structure does not.
Because of the age of the property, it's pretty much outlived its usefulness for a modern dental practice.
And I'm going to show you a couple of photos of the interior.
So you'll see there's the hallway.
And here's the waiting room.
So, you know, this has been a, as I said, it's been used for 50 years. It's been an important amenity. It's a neighborhood practice. It's served its purpose, but the practice is really, the buildings really become antiquated for a current medical, for a current dental practice, and that's the reason for the proposal for the construction of the new structure.
Now, in terms of the new structure, effectively what's going to happen is, as I mentioned, this is going to be demolished, and the new structure will be built on this portion right now, where we have the grass.
again all setbacks will be observed on all sides of the property originally where the structure is
we propose five parking spaces which complies with the code however the rco requested that we remove
the five parking spaces for two reasons one is they they prefer to have that area landscaped
over there and number two is their view is that and we agree that there's sufficient street side
parking in the neighborhood such that we don't need the on -site parking and I'm going to show
you a couple of photos that reflects that pretty well. All right so this is the this is the structure
right here. This is Leon Street, and you'll see pretty much this entire block, no parking,
same across the street. And then you'll see further down the road, again, parking on both
sides here, parking all along there. So between, you know, with the street side parking and the
RCO's desire to keep this area landscaped. We agreed, and we resubmitted the plan, as I mentioned,
and that generated the refusal for the parking.
Now, we submitted plans, and I'll show you the amended plans.
again that's the new structure and and this so this is where the parking would have been
under our original plan and you'll see it's now a landscaped area
and you'll see it's now a landscaped area.
All right, here's the amended plan. And what you'll see here is, it's a little hard to see,
but this shows 20 -foot rear yard requirement from here to here. And what you'll see here is,
This is all now open area, which we don't have.
And as I mentioned, all of these areas observe all setbacks.
So and the rear yard will now be 47 feet instead of zero feet.
So in summary, this is a longstanding use that's been serving the community for over 50 years.
The building, the use was previously approved by the zoning board.
The building was originally constructed for a single family. It's outgrown its use for dental practice. We're going to be demolishing a non -conforming structure and in its place, construct a fully conforming structure.
And for those reasons, we have the support of the RCO. And at the RCO meeting, no one voted in opposition to the proposal, and we have the support of Councilman Driscoll.
And that's my presentation.
You want to bring your client on and adopt your testimony, please?
Yes. Jatin Mavaya, please raise your hand.
Jatin Mavaya, please unmute yourself and wait for the chair.
Could you please state your name and spell for the court stenographer?
Yeah, it's Jatin, J -A -T -I -N, last name Movalia, M -O -V -A -L -I -A.
Right. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Proceed, counsel.
Dr. Movaya, did you hear my statements today regarding the property located at 3428 Ron Street?
And to the best of your knowledge, information, and belief, were my statements all true and correct?
and you adopt them as your own? Yes. Thank you. Questions from the board?
No, Chair. No, Chair.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience? Chair, we have David DeLugos.
Please unmute yourself and wait for the chair.
Sir, could you please state your name and spell for the court stenographer?
Sure. My name is David DeLugos, spelled D -A -V -I -D -D -L -U -G -O -S -Z.
Right. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Are you a neighbor?
Yeah, I am representing the Holmesworth Civic Association, and yes, I am a neighbor as well.
Proceed, sir.
I just wanted to attest to Mr. Reisman's assertions about our meeting and the conversations and make sure that, you know, it's not, I guess, was a usual request.
to have off -street parking removed, so I wanted to make sure I was here to go with that.
The community and the Civic Executive Board felt that because the footprint of the building
was effectively tripling and we were losing a lot of impervious or impervious ground space,
it was important to keep some of that lawn landscaping there, so I just wanted to add that to the record.
Thank you. Thank you so much for taking the time to call in, and we appreciate your viewpoint. Is there anyone else in the virtual audience?
Chair, I see no hands at this time.
Planning Commission.
Ron Bednar, City Planning. While this property is currently indicated for residential use on the city plan, we have no objection to the granting of the requested variance.
Thank you.
MI -2023 -001 -366 -3428
Ron Street. I vote yes.
Excuse me, Mr. Chair. We have a proviso for this one.
Okay. I vote yes proviso
per amended refusal dated 7 -18 -23.
James Snell. My vote is yes with proviso.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes with proviso.
Thank you, counsel.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman and board members.
Thank you.
Is there anyone in the virtual audience whose 2 p .m. case has not been called?
Chair, I see no hands at the sign.
Let's take a five -minute break and be back, and we'll have our court stenographer get set,
The stenographer gets it, and then we'll be ready to go and move through the 3 .30 list.
and then we'll be ready to go and move through the 3 .30 list.
Five minutes.
Okay. Sounds good.
Okay, Chair.
Thank you, Chair.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
how are we doing
doing good chair all right mr kelly yes sir i'm here perfect we're ready to go whenever you are
Okay, let's start.
We recording, Fatina?
we recording for tina not yet can i check all board members first please
Not yet.
Can I take a look?
okay yeah i was here mr holliman
he's been struggling all afternoon on that phone i know i feel bad yeah i i think the three of us
we we don't have a long list here so i think the three will just we'll just handle it okay i'll
call Tom the late at home. We can start the recording as you wish. Can you hear me, Mr. Chairman?
We can hear you now, sir. Yes. Mr. Chairman, Fatina, do Fatina unmute me or does she unmute me?
No, Mr. Holliman, we never mute any board members. It's all on you by you
muting and unmuting yourself. So I'm doing it all myself. Okay, thank you.
Yes, Tom.
We're ready to go for Tina.
Yes, Nikki, are you available to start the recording?
I'm sorry, Chair, may I just speak?
This is Tanya.
Mr. Halliman, you must remain muted until asked to speak so we don't get an echo.
Fine, thank you.
I will.
Can you hear me now?
Yes, thank you very kindly.
Okay, I will do that.
Thank you. I'm sorry, Chair, we are currently recording, so you may start as you wish.
Thank you. Good afternoon. My name is Bill Bergman. I will be chairing this ZBA afternoon
hearing. With me is our Vice Chair, Ismail Shahid. Present, Mr. Chairman. Our Board Member,
Thomas Holloman. Present, Mr. Chairman. Thank you. And James Snell, our Board Member.
Present, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you.
Also present is Hillary Emerson, our attorney, and our executive director, Tanya Sunken.
Here's our virtual format.
Be advised, the proceedings are being recorded.
A video will be available by contacting tanyasunken at phil .gov.
For the benefit of our court stenographer, we ask attorneys and witnesses to identify themselves before they testify.
If you're participating by phone and you wish to testify, press star nine to raise your hand
and star six to unmute. To win an appearance statement, call 267 -270 -5548. Leave your email
and the address of the property in question. And finally, the question and answer box on the screen
is not for comments or testimony. All comments should be directed to our executive director,
Tanya Sunkit. Let's look at our schedule for this afternoon.
Number one, MI 2023 -000 -784 -263 East Upland Street, Upsil Street. That case is continued.
Number three, MI 2023 -000 -839 -2349 East Allegheny. That case is continued.
And number five, MI 2023 -000781 -6123 East Worcester Street, we have a request for continuance from the RCO and also the council person. Mr. Anastasio, if you're in the audience.
Mr. Anastasio has been unmuted, Chair.
Mr. Anastasio, just for the record, state your name.
You've been sworn.
Vern, V -E -R -N, Anastasio, A -N -A -S -T -A -S -I -O.
So the RCO has a request and also the council person.
Mr. Chair, can we bring on any representatives from the council office and the RCO who made the request?
Sure. Is there anyone from the council office or the RCO?
Chair, we have Charles Richardson. He's been unmuted and allowed to speak.
Mr. Richardson, state your name, please, and spell for the court reporter.
Good afternoon, Mr. Chair. Charles Richardson, R -I -C -H -A -R -D -S -O -N, Office of Councilwoman Cindy Bass, room 508 City Hall.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Could you speak, please, about the request for continuance?
The request for continuance came from the RCO, the coordinating RCO and the RCO, requesting that they have continuance until certain issues were resolved that they had asked for.
and the Councilwoman was supporting the request for continuance from the
and the councilwoman was supporting the request for continuance from the rcos so you know it's
really up to you i know that mr anastasio has uh proposed to do a resumption hearing
to hear from the rco because they have not offered no uh letter as yet another council member as well
So so, again, that falls to you guys as to make that.
Mr. Anastasio. Yes, Mr. Chair, I would prefer to to have a be allowed to put the case on as it is and then come back.
I'm more than willing to meet with the RCO for the third time.
I'll be happy to do it because immediate neighbors are not attending and they're reticent to have a position.
I was able to get, you know, 77 signatures myself from the block, but the RCO would like to have at least some folks attend.
So this will be our third meeting, but I have no problem doing that so long as we can resume.
So we're going to continue the case. Instead of doing it, we're going to continue the case.
Okay, we'll try to get it back in as quick as we can.
Chair, this is Tanya.
If I may suggest that once Mr. Anastasio has handled all business, he contacted me to immediately assist with rescheduling.
That's right.
Thank you, Tanya.
Thank you so much.
I do appreciate that.
Thanks, everyone.
Charles, thanks for getting involved in it, too.
Thank you.
Thank you.
All right.
And number seven, MI -2022 -007 -620 -1214, Rockland Street.
This case has been withdrawn.
We're going to go to our regular list.
Any other requests for continuance?
I see no hands, Chair.
We're going to go to our regular list.
We're going to start with number eight, MI -2023 -0008.
817 -608 -WEST -FILLALINA -STREET.
Jacob Sitkin and Lorraine Feldman.
There's a letter of support from the West Mount Airy neighbors.
And also there's an email that came from the Condominium Association
approving this approval by their board here jacob sitkin is coming back in as a panelist thank you
good afternoon mr sit on mute please
thank you good afternoon hi could you state your name and spell please for the court
Yes, my name is Jacob, J -A -C -O -B, Sitkin, S -I -T -K -I -N.
Right. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
I do, sir.
So this application is for the extension of an existing balcony at the rear of a second floor of an existing detached structure.
Size and location, as shown on the plans, application extended balcony accessory to existing multifamily household living or dwelling units.
The existing use multifamily household living was previously granted by the ZBA and is being expanded and therefore requires a variance from the ZBA.
Our vice chair has just a few questions for you, sir.
Good afternoon, counsel.
Excuse me.
Have you emailed in all the required documents and exhibits that are needed to proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing?
Yes, I have.
There's one item that had been left out, which was our deed. I received a email from Hillary, and I sent that to her the next morning. So she has the deed as well.
Thank you. Thank you. Please proceed and share your screen.
You're coming up, Mr. Sitkin. That's good. We're good.
Okay. What I would like to show you are some pictures.
First of all, I want to state that I did submit as part of my package approval from the RCO and also an email from my near neighbor, who is, I believe, the only one who would be able to see the balcony.
and also approval from our HOA.
The condo building is small.
Okay. So the pictures that I want to show you, the current walkway is what you're seeing right now.
So the pictures that I want to show you
are the current walkway.
And this is what it looks like.
What we propose to do is, this is the view from the walkway towards our parking spots behind us.
and this is the back of the building this is where the balcony will be
this is a current balcony of uh one of the other condos and you can see that instead of a walkway
it extends from the wall of the building to the wall of the fire tower yeah um near neighbor who
gave us approval, if you can see my cursor, it lives over here, and so he would be seeing it from
his side. And this is the back. This is right now is what our breezeway looks like currently from
behind. And this is what the balcony will look like when it's done. Essentially, I believe that
our structural engineer is attending today, and he can speak to any technical issues regarding
the engineering structure, but these are the views of what we intend to do right here, and
ours will be down here on the first floor on this side of the fire tower.
So someone in the development has already done this? Yes, that is correct. This one was built,
I believe in 2005. And then last fall when we submitted our paperwork to get our permits to
build, they said that it extended the allowable space by several square feet. And therefore we
needed, as this one did back in 2005, a variance. Okay. All right. All right. Questions from the
board? No, Chair. No, Mr. Chairman. No, Chair. Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
Chair, we have Charles Richardson. They have been unmuted and allowed to speak.
Mr. Richardson, just state your name for the record, please.
Charles Richardson, R -I -C -H -A -R -D -S -O -N, Councilwoman Bass's Office, Room 508, City Hall.
I've been dealing with Mr. Sicken for a minute with this, and we're very happy to support his request for variance.
Thank you. Thank you. Thank you so much for calling in. We appreciate your input.
Is there anyone else in the virtual audience?
Chair, I see the other hands at this time.
Hi, Planning Commission.
This is Ron Bednar City Planning.
Property is indicated for residential use on the city plan.
Given the history and physical conditions of the site, we recommend the request of variance be granted.
Thank you.
So MI 2023 -000817 -608 West Philomena Street, I vote yes.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes.
James Snell, my vote is yes.
Ismail Shaheed, my vote is yes.
Sir, you have your votes.
Thank you, sir. Appreciate it. Sure.
And number four.
A quick question.
Will I get an official notification?
You will. You will.
Okay. Thank you.
Thank you.
Number four, MI 2023, 000775, 2917 Walkle Street.
Sean Ward is the attorney.
The Southport Richmond Civic Association has a recommendation of support
and non -opposition from Council Member Squilla.
Hi, Mr. Ward.
How are you?
Could you state your name, please, and spell for the court reporter?
Yes. Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman. I'm hanging in there. Sean Ward, S -H -A -W -N -W -A -R -D, attorney for owner and applicant.
Right. Do you swear for him to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Do you identify your client in relationship to the property?
I represent Elizabetta, that's E -L -I -Z -A -B -E -T -A, Domi, D -O -M -I, who is the owner of the property,
and her daughter, who is the applicant on behalf of her mother, Ava Domi, that's E -V -A
capital D -O -M -I. All right. And our vice chair has just a few questions for you, sir.
Our vice chair has just a few questions for you, sir.
Good afternoon, counsel. Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Yes, I do.
Have you emailed in all the required documents and exhibits that are needed to proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing?
Yes, I have.
Thank you. Please proceed and share your screen.
Thank you very much.
Mr. Chair, can we confirm my screen is shared?
We're fine. We're good.
Awesome. Thank you. Thank you very much.
I've submitted my typical exhibit packet, which includes, wait a minute, hold on.
A1 is the notice of refusal.
This was an application for a permit for a two -family dwelling in an existing structure, resulted in one refusal.
A two -family dwelling is not permitted in the CMX1 district.
Accordingly, we seek a use variance today.
A2 is the application of appeal.
A4, the project information form.
A4 is proof of ownership.
A5, tax clearance.
A6 is a site location map.
A7 are our photographs.
A8 is the petition of support.
A9 is the RCO letter of support from South Port Richmond Civic Association.
A10, it's my understanding that Councilman School's letter has been submitted.
I do have a copy today just in case. We have it too. Okay, excellent. So I would ask that that
be marked as A -10. A -11, the only relevant zoning history, in fact, the only zoning history
is a permit from 1955 for a grocery store in one family. A -12 is the relevant deed history.
A -13 is the zoning map and A -14 is the aerial photograph. So very quickly, we have our notice
of refusal. Again, it results in one refusal, two family, not permitted in a CMX -1.
We have our application of appeal, our project information form, my transmittal letter to
the board with the appeal, the deed, the DOMIS having purchased this property in March of
2021. Tax clearance, as you can see, taxes are paid through 2023. It would have balanced due
at zero. As far as the site location map goes, this is a Google map showing this property is
located just off of Aramingo Avenue at Munneth Street or just north of Somerset.
copy of our poster. This is a Google Street View. You can see the property as of 2018 was in quite
a state of disrepair and obviously a blight on a neighborhood. That's a corner shot. This is a
shot from a side street. Mr. Domi, being an Albanian immigrant to the United States, brought
his tradecraft with him and performed the renovations to the property. And as the board
can see, quite an improvement over what was previously existing and much to the splendor
of the neighborhood. I would point out that the property located directly behind us is also CMX1
and does in fact have a convenience store. Discussions with the neighbors indicated that
They are happy that it's not going to be another corner store, given the baggage, for lack of a better term, that comes with those.
The interior of the property, as you can see, it's all new fit and finish, new flooring, paint, new kitchens, upgraded kitchens, appliances, countertops, backsplash, cabinetry, et cetera.
we circulated a petition of support amongst the neighbors we have a two -page petition
with many neighbors you know not only on michael street but the surrounding streets as well
we met with sopo on january july 12th the meeting was well attended i would point out that the rco
notice did go out you know identifying the meeting as july 12th at seven o 'clock
It did go to 156 different neighbors on the list provided by the Planning Commission.
Despite that letter going out, only about 20 people that attended or 22 people that attended were eligible to vote given the proximity to the property.
That vote resulted in 16 in support with six opposed.
No reason was given for the opposition.
However, you know, we submit the letter in support.
Again, the second, you know, the only permit on file that we could find was a grocery store, delicatessen and a single family.
Again, the...
Again, that was in nineteen fifty five.
Other than that, there's no permit history whatsoever on the property.
no licenses, no anything. We would submit that this property has been vacant for quite some
period of time over possibly several owners. As you can see, the property is located predominantly
in an RSA 5 district. However, this property and the property directly behind us, as aforementioned,
are zoned at CMX1. And then we have the aerial photograph again showing this is Cambria.
Somerset is down a little bit further, and then Aramingo Avenue.
You can see a corner down here is located to the south, the southeast.
Given that, you know, we believe that the two family use is more appropriate given the neighborhood as opposed to adding another corner store, which is certainly not necessary in this area.
Again, Councilman Squilla has submitted his letter in non -opposition, given the support by SOPO.
I do have in the audience today Ava Domi.
I would ask Ava to raise her hand so she can verify and adopt.
I could you please state your name and spell for the court stenographer.
Chair, we don't have Ava Domi.
We have Elisabetta Domi.
that that would be her yeah okay they are unbuttoned and allowed to speak
hi could you state your name please and spell for the court stenographer
yes it's eva domi eva last name d -o -m -i right do you swear or affirm tell the truth the whole
truth nothing but the truth yes proceed counsel thank you chair uh eva you've heard my representations
to the board today yes are they true and correct to the best of your knowledge information and
belief yes and on behalf of yourself and your mother would you adopt them as your own testimony
correct yep thank you questions from the board no chair no mr chairman no chair questions or
comments from the virtual audience i see no hands chair planning commission
i'll take that as support ron
there he is no david oh no
just identify we're all all a little together you're all together over there go ahead good
afternoon chair my name is peter bernard i will be representing the planning commission
for the betterment of the stenographer.
My name is spelled B as in boy, A as in apple,
R as in Roger, A as in apple, sorry,
B as in boy, A as in apple, R as in Roger,
N as in Nancy, A as in apple, R as in Roger,
D as in dog.
Do you swear to affirm to tell the truth,
told truth, nothing but the truth?
I do, Chair.
Please proceed.
This property is indicated for neighborhood commercial
mixed use on the city plan.
Our adoptive plan recommended no change to the existing zoning at this location.
The applicant's hardship is not supported with evidence of unique physical circumstances that would have prevented it from being used in conformance with the code.
The applicant could have applied for a by -right permit under MIHB program, and therefore we recommend that the requested variance not be granted.
Mr. Ward, you're shaking your head. Do you have comments?
uh no uh you know mr chair we we stand by the application and the presentation to the board
the community supports it as does the councilman okay thank you mi2023 000 775 297
walkall street i vote yes thomas holliman my vote is yes james snell my vote is yes
thank you counsel thank you chair all right we're going to go to number two
mi 2023 000 773 539 moore street henry clinton is the attorney recommendation of support from
dickinson square west civic association and a letter of non -opposition from council member squilla
Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Clinton, you've already been sworn, just for the record, state your name.
Sure. Henry Clinton, C -L -I -N -T -O -N.
Sure, Henry Clinton, C -L -I -N -T -O -N.
And could you identify your client, the relationship to this property?
And could you identify your client?
Sure. My client is Kathleen O 'Banion. She's on the call.
Even though the property is in the name of an LLC, she is the sole member and has owned the property since 2006.
Our vice chair has just a few questions, sir.
Good afternoon, counsel. Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
I do, Mr. Shahid.
Have you emailed in all the required documents and exhibits that are needed to proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing?
We have, except the tax certification came in within the last couple of days.
Okay, please get that over to Hillary and let's proceed and share your screen.
And I wasn't clear. My tax certification is part of the package. I just didn't get it to her five days. I only got it to her two days ago.
Understood.
Thank you, Mr. Sheehy.
Thank you, Hillary.
May I share my screen?
Please.
Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman. Is this visible?
Yeah, it is. Thank you.
So this concerns 539 Moore Street.
The owner currently is South Work Properties, LLC.
My client, Kathleen O 'Banion, on the call has owned the property since 2006.
In 2013, she transferred it to an LLC based on the advice of her accountant, but she's the sole member of the LLC.
said. These are my exhibit contents, table of contents, A1 through A11, which I ASB admitted
into evidence. It's a pretty straightforward matter, Mr. Chairman. The refusal is, this is
an RSA 5 zoning district, and this has been a two -family dwelling since 2006. So we're asking
for the legalization of this two -family dwelling. And as I walk through the presentation, I'll show
the board that since 2006, my client has had a rental license in good stead and active for two
units, because when she purchased it, it was represented as a two -unit property.
This is a letter of support from the RCO, Dickinson, as well as we also have a letter,
as you mentioned, from the councilman's office in non -opposition. The community group is in full
support as are members of the neighborhood on the block, a number 7 or 8 to 10 on the 500 block of
Moore Street, which my client obtained. Photographs, this is the property to the right as you're looking
west on Moore Street. Again, this is looking east. There's a two -family use here, retail on the
first, single family above. Same thing on this corner, retail use on the first, and one or two
families above. We have some of the zoning records at the end. And also during the community meeting,
we learned that there was one other duplex on the block at 528 Moore Street. One of the
the women in the audience revealed that to everyone.
This is the listing that appeared.
My client happened to retain it from 2006.
We printed this out in July.
So it says 2003, but it's 539 more.
And it's represented as a duplex, a two family dwelling.
There are two one bedroom units in the property in 2006.
And it's continued that way up until the present time.
The front of the building with our postings, just one or two photographs of the inside.
This is a doorway leading into the property with the door leading to the first floor.
And then the steps are in the foreground leading up to the second floor.
Again, it's just a two -story structure, not three stories in any way.
These are the meters that are in the basement.
Again, this has been in play since 2006.
There's a meter for the first floor unit, one for the second floor unit.
and one for the common areas, the hallway, as well as the lights in the front and rear yard.
Floor plans, basic, Mr. Chairman.
Again, one bedroom on the first floor, kitchen, living, bath,
and one bedroom on the second floor,
repeating what we have on the first floor as kitchen, living, and bath.
The remaining documents are the application documents.
Here's our tax certification. As I said, we just we just got this recently on August 1st.
Zoning map indicating an RSA designation. And these are the deeds. Again, as I said to the chair at the outset, in 2006, my client purchased the property, has had it continuously since that time.
And then for recommendation of her accountant in 2013, she just transferred it to her.
recommendation of her accountant in 2013, she just transferred it to herself. And we do represent,
and my client will adopt my testimony, that she is the sole member of South Work LLC.
Next is our notice letter to the neighborhood. And then we have the zoning records just to show
the board that at the corner 1800 south 6th this is a retail on the first and an apartment on the
second floor these are the accompanying zoning documents indicating take out on the first and
one apartment above. This is the use permit for the one family, as well as the retail on the
first floor. And then this is a key document, Mr. Chairman. This is an active rental license
issued to Kathleen O 'Banion in September of 2006, shortly after she purchased it
as two units, and she's been paying this rental license for well over 15 years.
So with that, I'd like to suggest to the board that this warrants consideration for a long standing use of a property.
My client was not aware that it was not a duplex.
And interestingly, the way she came about knowing it is she decided to do some work in the rear of the property.
And when she applied for a permit, the L &I examiner told her this is not a duplex.
She said it's been a duplex all these years. So she did the right thing.
She approached me. She went through the application process and she wants to legalize what has happened in actuality, as I said, since 2006.
We're not altering the essential character of the neighborhood. There's other duplexes on the block.
We're not expanding the footprint or the use. We are in harmony, basically, with what the neighbors agree to and in harmony with the code.
And we're not impacting anyone's or any adjacent property's development or late in error.
Why don't you bring Ms. O 'Banion on, please?
Ms. O 'Banion, can you unmute yourself?
Chair Kathleen, O 'Banion has been unmuted and allowed to speak.
Hi, could you state your name, please, and spell for the court stenographer?
Kathleen, you're muted.
Am I still muted?
No, you're fine.
Could you state your name and spell for the court stenographer?
Kathleen, K -A -T -H -L -E -E -N, O 'Banion.
capital O apostrophe capital B A N I O N. Right. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth,
the whole truth and nothing but the truth? I do. Proceed, counsel. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Ms. O 'Banion, have you heard my testimony during the Zoom call? Yes, sir. If you had the opportunity
to testify, would you adopt my testimony as your own and as true and correct? Yes. And just one
other question. Have you owned the property continuously since 2006? Yes. Thank you,
Mr. O 'Bannon. Questions from the board? No, Chair. Ish? No, Mr. Chairman. Thanks, Tom. Ish? No, Chair.
Thank you. Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
chair i see no hands at this time planning commission uh ron bednar i'm back
the property is indicated for residential use on the city plan given its
documented use history and physical condition of the site recommend the quest variance be granted
Thank you. MI 2023 -000 -773 -539 Moore Street, I vote yes.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes.
James Snell, my vote is yes.
Ishmael Shahid, my vote is yes.
Thank you, counsel.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Okay, number six, MI 2023 -009 -10905 Diamond Street.
Vernon Anastasio is the attorney.
We were waiting on an RCO letter.
This Anastasio is coming back as a panelist now, Chair.
Mr. Anastasio, just for the record, state your name.
You've been sworn several times.
It's Vern Anastasio, A -N -A -S -T -A -S -I -O.
I represent Mahmoud Yamin.
Okay. Our vice chair has a few questions for you, sir.
Our vice chair has a few questions for you, sir.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Good afternoon, counsel. Please use me to read the reading of the refusal and stipulate it with accuracy.
I've emailed in all the required documents and exhibits that are needed to proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing.
Yes, sir.
Thanks, sir. Please proceed and share your screen.
right 905 diamond street
uh it's zone cmx2 my client literally bought this just at the beginning of the year
um it was brand new triplex three family dwelling one unit per floor and
it's this property here where my cursor is and um i want to show you i mean it's just
really nice property
and when he looked at the property this is what he found
fully rehabbed
triplex
four electric meters, one for each of the units and a house meter.
So prior to settlement, he thought he was doing his due diligence and went through the city's sites and page 24 of my exhibit packet.
he sees that zoning and use registration permits, as of last year, in fact, just about a year ago,
complied. And in order to make this a compliant issue, Ellen and I would have had to go out
to the site and inspect the property itself. So relying on this, he proceeded to go ahead and
purchased it in January for just about a half a million dollars. And then he finds out subsequent
to the purchase that it's not zoned for three family dwelling and that it's CMX2. RM1 adjacent,
but still CMX2. So this is the layout of the property. Each unit pictures really do it justice,
But here's the first floor. Here's the second floor. And that's the basement. There's the third floor. Basement's just mechanicals.
so he's in this predicament now where he spent about a half a million dollars on a property
even after checking to make sure lni had uh it was used marked that use complied
uh just to find out that in fact it's not the corridor itself although it's cmx2 there's no
there's no real commercial on this block right next door is a triplex
on the other side of the property is a boarded up commercial space four units above
there appears to be a beer deli on the corner and the beer deli is the extent
unfortunately of the commercial activity on the block 909 and 911 is a church
907, of course, is our prop, 907 is a triplex next door.
905 is our property.
The adjacent property, as I said, is vacant with four units.
And I believe this is the beer joint.
This property was multifamily zoned, got the zoning for it,
but that now is just boarded up
it with a gate around it and overgrown leaves, weeds. There's a vacant lot here. And then these
two properties are older single -family homes. And then one large multifamily apartment building is
being built. So save the beer deli if it's still open. There's absolutely no commercial activity
on this block right across the street is a basketball court so for those reasons because
and because my client had a reliant interest uh when checking with lni again it could never be
marked compliant without an inspection first and it was marked uh and to convert this property back
to a uh anything but what it is would be just uh
to a uh anything but what it is would be just uh lay the property to waste as i said he was just
under half a million dollars that he purchased the property for let's look here in 1976 as far
back as then the property was a vacant store and three apartments and then they were able to get a
permit for an amusement center that was basically pinballs back then there wasn't too many uh
video games in 76 but there were pinballs and there were pool tables on the first floor and
three apartments above so if you look at it the use of it historically what we're proposing is
actually a step down from that um with just three nice size top top you know top end um
living units. We did meet with the RCO, 144 individual households were mailed.
We did not, we were sort of, there were some concerns. We were trying to reach through a CBA
settlement agreement. That still may be in the works, but they have not come down definitively
on it aside from that the um the fact that my client relied on the lni compliance uh which had
to happen pursuant to an inspection and the fact that there is you know demonstrably no uh commercial
activity on this otherwise cmx block i respectfully request the granting of the variance
and with that i'll ask my client to raise his virtual hand if that's okay mr chair yeah please
Mahmoud, please raise your hand.
There, Mahmoud Yagnam has been allowed to speak.
Sir, could you state your name, please, and spell for the court stenographer?
Hi, my name is Mahmoud Yagnam, M -A -H -M -O -U -D, last name Y -A -G -H -N -A -M.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Proceed, counsel.
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Mahmoud, did you hear my presentation to the board this afternoon?
Is it true and accurate to the best of your knowledge?
And do you adopt it as your own testimony?
Thank you.
Questions from the board?
No, Chair.
No, Mr. Chairman.
No, Chair.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
There, I see no hands at this time.
Planning Commission, this is Ron Bednar, City Planning.
While this property is currently indicated for neighborhood commercial mixed use on the city plan, in the physical circumstances of the site, we recommend that the question variance be granted, provided maximum two dwelling units only.
I don't know what to do with the third one. Sorry, Mr. Chair.
He bought three.
Hillary, we don't have an RCO letter, am I right?
That is correct, Mr. Chair.
So why don't we close this and just wait for the RCO letter, and then we'll vote.
And we'll give it a period of time.
If we don't get one, then we'll vote anyway.
Good idea.
Yeah, Mr. Chair, I was going to suggest two weeks.
That's fine with me.
Yeah, so we'll vote this August 16th at 2 p .m.
And the record is closed except for the RCO letter.
and any response from Mr. Anastasio if necessary. Thank you, Ms. Emerson. Okay. Thank you. Thank you.
We're going to vote on at 2 o 'clock or at 3 .30? I'm just putting on my notes.
2 o 'clock. We usually vote 2. All right. That's great. Thank you. Is there anyone
in the virtual audience whose case has not been called on the 3 .30 list?
i see no hands at this time chair okay thanks everyone we've done a little bit early today
we don't usually get done this early thank you all this is the earliest ever i just wanted to
say thank you all team zba you guys are amazing and chair and board members thank you for a
wonderful night all right thank you all right bye take care good night good night good night all
Thank you.
Thank you.